Comparison of perfect table cryptanalytic tradeoff algorithms

Performance Comparison of Cryptanalytic Time Memory Data Tradeoff Methods

“…One consequence of this result is that the explicit formulas for time complexities associated with any set of parameters that were obtained in [12,13,14,15] for the single-target tradeoff methods can easily be understood to be those for the multi-target tradeoff methods. It suffices to replace every table count ℓ appearing in those formulas with the product of table count and target count being used by the multi-target tradeoff method.…”

“…Recall that the performances of different single-target tradeoff methods could be compared [12,15] based on the range of pre-computation coefficient and tradeoff coefficient pairs that are made available by each method through various parameter choices achieving a common success rate. Since any storage optimization technique that reduces the number of bits required to record each pre-computation table entry does not depend on the number of targets, we can apply the same performance comparison strategy to multi-target tradeoff methods.…”

“…The reader can refer to the beginning sections of [12,13,14,15] for a streamlined review of the notation and details of the single-target tradeoff methods. We will use D to denote the number of targets given to a multi-target tradeoff method.…”

“…For a tradeoff method of D targets, its tradeoff coefficient is defined to be T M 2 D 2 /N 2 and its pre-computation coefficient is defined to be P D/N . These two definitions reduce to their corresponding single-target definitions given by [12,13,14,15] when D = 1.…”

“…This work relies heavily on the recent analyses [12,13,14,15] of the five methods that were carried out in the single-target setting. Based on an in-depth understanding of these previous results, we extract just the core arguments and cleverly adjust them to be applicable to the multi-target setting, treating all five methods simultaneously.…”