Intel® Integrated Performance Primitives
Community support and discussions relating to developing high-performance vision, signal, security, and storage applications.
Announcements
This community is designed for sharing of public information. Please do not share Intel or third-party confidential information here.

ECCPSignSM2 or GFpECSignSM2

huang__zhongqiang
252 Views
0 Kudos
1 Solution
Igor_A_Intel
Employee
252 Views

Hi Zhongqiang,

Below is related information from IPP crypto expert:

Right, there are 2 implementations of EC functionality in IPP.

The 1-st, from historically point of view, there was ippsECCPxxx. This implementation assumes prime underlying Finite Field GF(p).

Later, IPP introduces another one – ippsGFpECxxx functionality. This implementation assumes prime underlying Field could be either prime (GF(p)) as extension of Finite Field (GF(p^n)) or even multi extension GF(p^n^m).

In any means, ippsGFpECxxx functionality is more general and flexible.

 

Why IPP did that? Some of our customers are using EC over extension of Finite Field.

What is the future of ippsECPxxx functionality? Believe it will be deprecated. So, it could be better to use ippsGFpECxxx functionality instead of old ippsECCPxx one.

 

Functions ECCPSignSM2 and GFpECSignSM2 are the same (at least in terms of result) if GFpECSM2 is using prime underlying Finite Field.

 

regards, Igor

View solution in original post

3 Replies
Igor_A_Intel
Employee
253 Views

Hi Zhongqiang,

Below is related information from IPP crypto expert:

Right, there are 2 implementations of EC functionality in IPP.

The 1-st, from historically point of view, there was ippsECCPxxx. This implementation assumes prime underlying Finite Field GF(p).

Later, IPP introduces another one – ippsGFpECxxx functionality. This implementation assumes prime underlying Field could be either prime (GF(p)) as extension of Finite Field (GF(p^n)) or even multi extension GF(p^n^m).

In any means, ippsGFpECxxx functionality is more general and flexible.

 

Why IPP did that? Some of our customers are using EC over extension of Finite Field.

What is the future of ippsECPxxx functionality? Believe it will be deprecated. So, it could be better to use ippsGFpECxxx functionality instead of old ippsECCPxx one.

 

Functions ECCPSignSM2 and GFpECSignSM2 are the same (at least in terms of result) if GFpECSM2 is using prime underlying Finite Field.

 

regards, Igor

huang__zhongqiang
252 Views

Hi Igor,

Your answer is very helpful.

Also, is there SM2 encryption and decryption APIs (encrypt by public key and decrypt by private key) in ippcp? I only found SM2 signing and verification functions in ippcp, no SM2 encryption/decryption functions.

Igor_A_Intel
Employee
252 Views

IPP doesn't provide such functionality. You can submit a feature request via official channel.

regards, Igor

Reply