Cryptography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for software developers, mathematicians and others interested in cryptography. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Classic Feistel Networks and various types of FN's are sequential in nature. [1]has a good overview of different types. But is there a way we can do Feistel Networks in parallel and achieve good security bounds ?

  1. Hoang, Viet Tung, and Phillip Rogaway. "On generalized Feistel networks." Advances in Cryptology–CRYPTO 2010. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010. 613-630.
share|improve this question
I'm not quite clear on what you mean, but OTR might be of interest to you – figlesquidge Apr 24 '14 at 11:03
I don't think you can do that, because you need the output of a round to calculate the output of the next round , so there is no way to compute that in paralel – user1028028 Apr 24 '14 at 11:32
up vote 1 down vote accepted

The standard way to make best advantage of parallelism is to use a parallelizable mode of operation. For instance, counter mode (CTR mode) is highly parallelizable. Parallelism at the level of the mode of operation is typically more effective and easier to implement than parallelism inside the block cipher.

The Feistel network approach to block ciphers is inherently sequential, so not a good candidate for parallelization. If you wanted to do fine-grained parallelism inside the block cipher, you'd probably design your block cipher differently (e.g., a la Serpent and bitslice ciphers) -- but doing parallelism at the level of the mode of operation is typically even more effective.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.