Timeline for Alternatives to sbox's for diffusion?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 18, 2017 at 22:56 | history | edited | Paul Uszak | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Renamed active to real time computed as per comments
|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:48 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://crypto.stackexchange.com/ with https://crypto.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Feb 19, 2017 at 13:10 | vote | accept | Nat | ||
| Feb 19, 2017 at 12:12 | vote | accept | Nat | ||
| Feb 19, 2017 at 13:10 | |||||
| Feb 19, 2017 at 7:00 | comment | added | Richie Frame | @EllaRose I think the omission of a linear layer was intentional, as this answer addresses the diffusion provided by the s-box alone, as his comment to the question indicates | |
| Feb 19, 2017 at 6:57 | comment | added | Richie Frame | I agree, "active s-box" should be replaced with "realtime computed s-box" | |
| Feb 18, 2017 at 23:36 | comment | added | Ella Rose | An "s-box" is usually just a memoized function. An "active s-box" actually has a pretty well defined meaning in cryptography already. Redefining the vocabulary may confuse people. I think it is more clear and less confusing to say that an s-box is an NxM bit mapping that is typically computed lazily via a lookup table, as opposed to explicitly evaluating the complicated function it represents. Also, you do not mention linear diffusion layers at all, which is basically the only other component and source of diffusion of many algorithms. | |
| Feb 18, 2017 at 23:15 | history | answered | Paul Uszak | CC BY-SA 3.0 |