[ANN] Nxt Bounty for working JavaScript code that signs and verifies signatures - page 2.

gimre

legendary

Activity: 866

Merit: 1002

Quote from: Jaguar0625 on January 15, 2014, 08:06:51 PM

Quote from: hoax on January 15, 2014, 11:59:44 AM

We should test everything in same environment

I would be appreciated if Jaguar0625 measure time for my latest version(which use rev22 math with some optimizations).

Here are the latest numbers for hoax's code:

Code:

Javascript needs 3.6ms/getPublicKey
Javascript needs 6.9ms/sign
Javascript needs 7.8ms/verify

Nice job!

Could I kindly ask you to run test also on my code?

gimre

legendary

Activity: 866

Merit: 1002

Something told me, to do tests on Jaguar's test set, and glad I did, cause I've found small bug in my implementation.

Here's my code, https://github.com/gimer/curve25519nxt
inside testing.js there are some simple tests along with Jaguar's tests.

It's based on objects rather than modules.

I doubt it'll beat hoax implementation though.

Here are some numbers, from my machine.

Code:

testCurveKeygen: 764.000ms
testCurveSign: 0.000ms
testCurveVerify: 1200.000ms
testCryptoKey: 703.000ms
testCryptoSign: 1498.000ms (~~ 15ms/sign)

Oh, PS, also api is a bit strange, I'd find it more covenient if everything passed to JS would be wrapped in typed arrays already.

hoax

newbie

Activity: 36

Merit: 0

Quote from: Jaguar0625 on January 15, 2014, 08:06:51 PM

Quote from: hoax on January 15, 2014, 11:59:44 AM

We should test everything in same environment

I would be appreciated if Jaguar0625 measure time for my latest version(which use rev22 math with some optimizations).

Here are the latest numbers for hoax's code:

Code:

Javascript needs 3.6ms/getPublicKey
Javascript needs 6.9ms/sign
Javascript needs 7.8ms/verify

Nice job!

Thank you

Jaguar0625

sr. member

Activity: 299

Merit: 250

Quote from: hoax on January 15, 2014, 11:59:44 AM

We should test everything in same environment

I would be appreciated if Jaguar0625 measure time for my latest version(which use rev22 math with some optimizations).

Here are the latest numbers for hoax's code:

Code:

Javascript needs 3.6ms/getPublicKey
Javascript needs 6.9ms/sign
Javascript needs 7.8ms/verify

Nice job!

hoax

newbie

Activity: 36

Merit: 0

Quote from: BloodyRookie on January 15, 2014, 12:51:15 PM

Hmmm.....you didn't understand what I was trying to say, so here we go again.

You're right. Thank you. I've fixed it and will look at this closer again

gimre

legendary

Activity: 866

Merit: 1002

My new results, I forgot to turn off miner when doing previous tests Wink

chrom-opera:

Code:

curveSelfTest : ok
sign time: 25.000ms
verify time: 16.000ms
sign+verify time: 41.000ms
verified? true
doing 20 signs
sigs20: 396.000ms
doing 20 verifies
verify20: 307.000ms
true,true,true,true,true,true,true,true,false,true,true,true,true,false,true,true,true,false,true,false

chrome:

Code:

curveSelfTest : ok
sign time: 25.000ms
verify time: 16.000ms
sign+verify time: 41.000ms
verified? true
doing 20 signs
sigs20: 396.000ms
doing 20 verifies
verify20: 307.000ms
true,true,true,true,true,true,true,true,false,true,true,true,true,false,true,true,true,false,true,false

I don't think I'll get to anything better than that...

Also on what data do you operate inside functions?
As I find requirement, to take input as "hex strings" quite ugly.

P.S. My sign looks more or less like this:

Code:

function crypto_sign(privKey, messageHash)
{
var pubAndS = this.c.genPubWithS(privKey);
var sess = pubAndS.s;

var x = SHA256(...);
var Y = this.c.genPub(x).key;

var h = SHA256(...);

var vh = this.c.sign(h, x, sess);
return {sig: vh, key: pubAndS.key};
}

BloodyRookie

hero member

Activity: 687

Merit: 500

Quote from: hoax on January 15, 2014, 11:59:44 AM

Quote from: BloodyRookie on January 15, 2014, 11:50:37 AM

@hoax: I don't think your version of is_negative is compatible with the java version, or is it?

Code:

/* checks if x is "negative", requires reduced input */
function is_negative(x)
{
return x[0] & 0xFF >= 0x80;
}

This check for overflow. Tested on Jaguar0625 tests(generated from Java) and get 100/100 passed, so... You can correct me if i'm wrong.

Hmmm.....you didn't understand what I was trying to say, so here we go again.
Your code: is_negative(1) returns 0 (hopefully the & operator gets executed before >= operator).
Java code: is_negative(1) returns 1.

Since u use your is_negativ for both siging and verifying, it works.
But if u sign with your code and try to verify with the java code, it should fail sometimes (didn't test that but it really should fail).

hoax

newbie

Activity: 36

Merit: 0

Quote from: BloodyRookie on January 15, 2014, 11:40:43 AM

Hmmm...chrome is indeed faster but even on a 3GHz maschine I don't get your results:

Code:

Javascript needs 12.22ms/getPublicKey
Javascript needs 26.24ms/sign
Javascript needs 21.18ms/verify

What am I doing wrong?

Quote from: BloodyRookie on January 15, 2014, 11:40:43 AM

Hmmm...chrome is indeed faster but even on a 3GHz maschine I don't get your results:

Code:

Javascript needs 12.22ms/getPublicKey
Javascript needs 26.24ms/sign
Javascript needs 21.18ms/verify

What am I doing wrong?

Just runned in ff26: 22ms(avg)/sign 16ms(avg)/verify.

As i can see it depends on loop count(more loops - better time) and browser wish(sometimes it do everything slower(extensions, synchronization, etc??).

We should test everything in same environment

I would be appreciated if Jaguar0625 measure time for my latest version(which use rev22 math with some optimizations).

Quote from: BloodyRookie on January 15, 2014, 11:50:37 AM

@hoax: I don't think your version of is_negative is compatible with the java version, or is it?

Code:

/* checks if x is "negative", requires reduced input */
function is_negative(x)
{
return x[0] & 0xFF >= 0x80;
}

This check for overflow. Tested on Jaguar0625 tests(generated from Java) and get 100/100 passed, so... You can correct me if i'm wrong.

And you can remove in your sources second argument from

Code:

SHA256_write(m, m.length);

it was my copy-paste typo, sorry Sad

BloodyRookie

hero member

Activity: 687

Merit: 500

@hoax: I don't think your version of is_negative is compatible with the java version, or is it?

Code:

/* checks if x is "negative", requires reduced input */
function is_negative(x)
{
return x[0] & 0xFF >= 0x80;
}

gimre

legendary

Activity: 866

Merit: 1002

Quote from: BloodyRookie on January 15, 2014, 09:28:08 AM

@gimre: On what kind of cpu r u testing, gimre?

laptop, i7, 2.2G

Quote from: Jaguar0625 on January 15, 2014, 09:51:48 AM

Quote from: BloodyRookie on January 15, 2014, 09:28:08 AM

@Jaguar0625: 9.8ms/getPublicKey with javascript?

Yes, but don't worry, I ran your code too and it was faster

. These are the results for your code on my machine (i am using the test js/html from your repo):

Code:

Javascript needs 5.5ms/getPublicKey
Javascript needs 12ms/sign
Javascript needs 9.5ms/verify

I suspect you're seeing slower numbers on your machine because you're testing in FireFox. AFAIK, Chrome has a faster JavaScript interpreter.

WOW, these look incredible!

BloodyRookie

hero member

Activity: 687

Merit: 500

Hmmm...chrome is indeed faster but even on a 3GHz maschine I don't get your results:

Code:

Javascript needs 12.22ms/getPublicKey
Javascript needs 26.24ms/sign
Javascript needs 21.18ms/verify

What am I doing wrong?

hoax

newbie

Activity: 36

Merit: 0

Thanks to Jaguar0625 for tests. I just runned my latest version(on github) on them, all tests are passed

hoax

newbie

Activity: 36

Merit: 0

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on January 15, 2014, 11:13:22 AM

Quote from: Jaguar0625 on January 15, 2014, 09:51:48 AM

Javascript needs 5.5ms/getPublicKey
Javascript needs 12ms/sign
Javascript needs 9.5ms/verify

So, who said that 10ms is impossible?

We talk about 1ghz core? Wink

But in overall, yes, i was too pessimistic

On my pc(core i5 2.67ghz) i now get 7.5ms(avg) for sign and 5.5ms(avg) for verify in Chrome

Come-from-Beyond

legendary

Activity: 2142

Merit: 1009

Newbie

Quote from: Jaguar0625 on January 15, 2014, 09:51:48 AM

Javascript needs 5.5ms/getPublicKey
Javascript needs 12ms/sign
Javascript needs 9.5ms/verify

So, who said that 10ms is impossible?

Come-from-Beyond

legendary

Activity: 2142

Merit: 1009

Newbie

Quote from: Jaguar0625 on January 15, 2014, 09:08:19 AM

Since the Java code is producing deterministic signatures, I'm assuming you want the JavaScript port to have the same behavior?

If not, that would potentially open up other areas for optimization.

I want the same behavior.

Jaguar0625

sr. member

Activity: 299

Merit: 250

And for completeness, these are the numbers I see for hoax's implementation:

Code:

Javascript needs 16.6ms/getPublicKey
Javascript needs 33.8ms/sign
Javascript needs 27ms/verify

It looks like I have a lot of catching up to do :/.

Jaguar0625

sr. member

Activity: 299

Merit: 250

Quote from: BloodyRookie on January 15, 2014, 09:28:08 AM

@Jaguar0625: 9.8ms/getPublicKey with javascript?

Yes, but don't worry, I ran your code too and it was faster

. These are the results for your code on my machine (i am using the test js/html from your repo):

Code:

Javascript needs 5.5ms/getPublicKey
Javascript needs 12ms/sign
Javascript needs 9.5ms/verify

I suspect you're seeing slower numbers on your machine because you're testing in FireFox. AFAIK, Chrome has a faster JavaScript interpreter.

hoax

newbie

Activity: 36

Merit: 0

Quote from: BloodyRookie on January 14, 2014, 11:55:17 AM

What else do you think is not working?

I was wrong

But also confused by "It's a normal behavior"(c)CfB

BloodyRookie

hero member

Activity: 687

Merit: 500

@gimre: On what kind of cpu r u testing, gimre?
@Jaguar0625: 9.8ms/getPublicKey with javascript?

gimre

legendary

Activity: 866

Merit: 1002

Quote from: BloodyRookie on January 15, 2014, 06:56:57 AM

Quote from: gimre on January 15, 2014, 03:46:21 AM

I would appreciate if anyone would share his (her?) results from within the browser

I am not speed testing the bare Curve25519 functions but the getPublicKey, sign and verify function from Cryto class (converted to javascript).
On my i7 950 3.07GHz (you need to tell us what cpu u r using) using firefox v26 I get:

Code:

Speed test
Javascript needs 21.66ms/getPublicKey
Javascript needs 46.92ms/sign
Javascript needs 39.34ms/verify
Finished

glad you figured, I also went <100ms for whole sig+verify, will post details later

(the thing is I operate on data in bit different format, so I'll have to preprocess it first... and that'll have penalty for sure)

Topic: [ANN] Nxt Bounty for working JavaScript code that signs and verifies signatures - page 2. (Read 8406 times)