A Compact Implementation of AES S‐Box Using Evolutionary Algorithm. Issue 4 (1st July 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Liu, Yaoping; Wu, Ning; Zhang, Xiaoqiang; Zhou, Fang; Ge, Fen
• Is Part Of: Chinese journal of electronics. Volume 26:Issue 4(2017)
• Page Start: 688
• Page End: 695
• Publication Date: 2017-07-01
• Subjects: Advanced encryption standard (AES) -- Composite field arithmetic (CFA) -- S‐Box -- Evolutionary algorithm (EA); CMOS integrated circuits -- Galois fields -- genetic algorithms -- public key cryptography; AES S‐box -- evolutionary algorithm -- composite field arithmetic technology -- CFA technology -- genetic algorithm -- Cartesian genetic programming model -- CGP model -- hardware complexity reduction -- multiplicative inverse mapping -- GF(28) -- composite field GF((24)2) -- compact MI circuit -- compact multiplication circuit -- CMOS technology -- advanced encryption standard -- voltage 1.8 V -- size 180 nm; Electronics -- Periodicals; Electronics -- China -- Periodicals; Electronics; China; Periodicals; 621.38105
• DOI: 10.1049/cje.2016.08.021
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1022-4653

Abstract

Abstract : S‐Box based on Composite field arithmetic (CFA) technology is optimized by Genetic algorithm (GA) and Cartesian genetic programming (CGP) model for reducing the hardware complexity. After using the CFA technique to map Multiplicative inverse (MI) over GF(2 8 ) into composite field GF((2 4 ) 2 ), the compact MI circuit over GF(2 4 ) is selected from 100 evolved circuits, and same design method is applied to the compact multiplication circuit over GF(2 2 ). Compared with the direct implementations, the areas of optimized circuits of MI over GF(2 4 ) and multiplication over GF((2 2 ) 2 ) are reduced by 66% and 57.69%, respectively. The area reductions for MI over GF(2 8 ) and the whole of S‐Box are up to 59.23% and 56.14%, separately. In 180nm 1.8V COMS technology, compared to previous works, the S‐Box proposed in this paper has the minimum area and minimum power, which are 11.27% and 6.65% smaller than that of the smallest area S‐Box, respectively.