Skip to content

Add ML-KEM to perf test #1126

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
vavroch2010 opened this issue Mar 3, 2025 · 3 comments
Open

Add ML-KEM to perf test #1126

vavroch2010 opened this issue Mar 3, 2025 · 3 comments

Comments

@vavroch2010
Copy link

Add ML-KEM to perf tests and run them by default

@andrewkdinh
Copy link

The performance tests for all the PQC algorithms will requires some extra discussion to actually decide what will be measured and what the end result graphs will look like. Generally, we want to test the functionality that will be most used for each PQC algorithm (sign, verify, key generation, etc.).

At the moment, we are concerned about how the PQC algorithms compare to other elliptic curve algorithms, such as ECDSA. We are particularly concerned about how changing the default TLS group list with openssl/openssl#26801 affects the TLS handshake.

In the future, we may want to compare the performance against itself between different OpenSSL versions similar to how the performance graphs are designed now. However, the underlying providers likely won't change and instead possible changes in EVP layer will probably affect performance.

CC: @vdukhovni & @Sashan

@baentsch
Copy link

baentsch commented Mar 7, 2025

possibly helpful discussion at openssl/openssl#26111

@andrewkdinh
Copy link

Created a Google Doc to discuss PQC performance testing (shared with everybody in Corporation). Please feel free to add clarification or comments. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ogn79V5xehPuLE2v0TVBhHccsY__8YFK6yYFSbk7uYc/edit?usp=sharing

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Pre-Refinement
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants