|
|
|
|
|
by tialaramex
1934 days ago
|
|
Sure, SIKE is not so much bigger than existing approaches, but it is much slower than they are. Some of the other choices aren't so much slower but are far bigger, for example McEliece systems. There's lots of opportunities to make different trade-offs - at least if all of them survive a bit more scrutiny by smart motivated opponents - but they're all generally worse than what we have now - except that they resist Shor's algorithm. |
|
I don't think that's a problem for end users, you are not constantly generating keys. It will be a problem for servers handling thousands of connections per second, but I'm sure dedicated HSMs will appear if there is a need for them.
In any case, I'm not an expert in crypto, just a poor sysadmin-by-accident who likes reading about the latest security developments so the bad guys don't pwn my servers. And as you said, engineering is always full of trade-offs, let's see what the NIST PQC standardization process will decide.