Advertisement

Hybrid approach of parallel implementation on CPU–GPU for high-speed ECDSA verification

  • Sokjoon Lee
  • Hwajeong SeoEmail author
  • Hyeokchan Kwon
  • Hyunsoo Yoon
Article
  • 9 Downloads

Abstract

Since the advent of deep belief network deep learning technology in 2006, artificial intelligence technology has been utilized in various convergence areas, such as autonomous driving and medical care. Some services requiring fast decision making and action typically work seamlessly with edge computing service model. In autonomous driving of a connected vehicle with vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communication, roadside unit (RSU) acts as an edge computing device and it will make safer service by processing V2X messages fast, sent by vehicles or other devices. IEEE 1609.2 standard provides application message security technology to ensure the security and reliability of vehicle-to-vehicle communication messages. It uses elliptic curve digital signature algorithm (ECDSA) signatures based on the NIST p256 curve for message authenticity. In this paper, we investigate that RSU should be able to verify 3500 ECDSA signatures per second considering the expected maximum number of vehicles on nearby roads (e.g., during rush hour), message transmission rate, and IEEE 802.11p wireless channel capacity. RSU should satisfy this requirement without assistance of hardware-based cryptographic accelerator. For the requirement, we propose a hybrid approach of parallel ECDSA signature verification at high speed by using CPU and GPU, simultaneously. Moreover, we implemented the proposed method in various modern computing environments for RSU and edge computing devices. Through the experiments, we reach the conclusion that GPU can contribute to the required performance of ECDSA signature verification in RSU platform, which could not satisfy the above throughput only with CPU unit. The target platform with Intel Pentium E6500 CPU and GeForce GTX650 GPU can verify 5668 signatures per second with 30% utilization, while CPU in the platform can process only 2640 signatures. Even in a higher-performance edge computing device, we examine experimentally that the performance can be further improved by using the proposed hybrid approach.

Keywords

High-speed ECDSA signature verification Parallel implementation on CPU–GPU V2X communication OpenCL Edge computing AI 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Institute for Information & communications Technology Promotion(IITP) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (No.B0717-16-0097, Development of V2X Service Integrated Security Technology for Autonomous Driving Vehicle).

References

  1. 1.
    Hinton GE, Osindero S, Teh Y-W (2006) A fast learning algorithm for deep belief nets. Neural comput 18(7):1527–1554MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hinton G, Deng L, Yu D, Dahl GE, Mohamed A-R, Jaitly N, Senior A, Vanhoucke V, Nguyen P, Sainath TN et al (2012) Deep neural networks for acoustic modeling in speech recognition: the shared views of four research groups. IEEE Signal Process Mag 29(6):82–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Graves A, Mohamed A-R, Hinton G (2013) Speech recognition with deep recurrent neural networks. In: 2013 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, pp 6645–6649Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    He K, Zhang X, Ren S, Sun J (2016) Deep residual learning for image recognition. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp 770–778Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Simonyan K, Zisserman A (2014) Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.1556
  6. 6.
    Collobert R, Weston J (2008) A unified architecture for natural language processing: deep neural networks with multitask learning. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Machine Learning. ACM, pp 160–167Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Manning C, Surdeanu M, Bauer J, Finkel J, Bethard S, McClosky D (2014) The Stanford CoreNLP natural language processing toolkit. In: Proceedings of 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations, pp 55–60Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen C, Seff A, Kornhauser A, Xiao J (2015) Deepdriving: learning affordance for direct perception in autonomous driving. In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). IEEE, pp 2722–2730Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Endsley MR (2017) Autonomous driving systems: a preliminary naturalistic study of the Tesla model S. J Cogn Eng Decis Mak 11(3):225–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yu N, Yu Z, Gu F, Li T, Tian X, Pan Y (2017) Deep learning in genomic and medical image data analysis: challenges and approaches. J Inf Process Syst 13(2):204–214Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Singh J, Singh G, Singh R (2017) Optimization of sentiment analysis using machine learning classifiers. Hum Centric Comput Inf Sci 7(1):32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Glorot X, Bordes A, Bengio Y (2011) Domain adaptation for large-scale sentiment classification: a deep learning approach. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML-11), pp 513–520Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Silver D, Huang A, Maddison CJ, Guez A, Sifre L, Van Den Driessche G, Schrittwieser J, Antonoglou I, Panneershelvam V, Lanctot M et al (2016) Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature 529(7587):484–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mnih V, Kavukcuoglu K, Silver D, Rusu AA, Veness J, Bellemare MG, Graves A, Riedmiller M, Fidjeland AK, Ostrovski G et al (2015) Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning. Nature 518(7540):529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Satyanarayanan M (2017) The emergence of edge computing. Computer 50(1):30–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Finogeev AG, Parygin DS, Finogeev AA (2017) The convergence computing model for big sensor data mining and knowledge discovery. Hum Centric Comput Inf Sci 7(1):11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mach P, Becvar Z (2017) Mobile edge computing: a survey on architecture and computation offloading. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 19(3):1628–1656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shi W, Cao J, Zhang Q, Li Y, Xu L (2016) Edge computing: vision and challenges. IEEE Internet Things J 3(5):637–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shah S. How is cloud different from edge in an IoT environment? https://www.collaberatact.com/cloud-different-edge-iot-environment/. Accessed 15 June 2018
  20. 20.
    Shahzadi S, Iqbal M, Dagiuklas T, Qayyum ZU (2017) Multi-access edge computing: open issues, challenges and future perspectives. J Cloud Comput 6(1):30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rescorla E, Modadugu N (2012) Datagram transport layer security version 1.2. IETF RFC 6347Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Granjal J, Monteiro E, Silva JS (2015) Security for the internet of things: a survey of existing protocols and open research issues. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 17(3):1294–1312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Keoh SL, Kumar SS, Tschofenig H (2014) Securing the internet of things: a standardization perspective. IEEE Internet Things J 1(3):265–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dennis EP. Review of NHTSA proposal to mandate V2V communication for safety. https://www.cargroup.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/nhtsa_v2v_nprm_review_car_20dec20161.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2018
  25. 25.
    DSRC Committee (2016) Dedicated short range communications (DSRC) message set dictionary. SAE Standard J 2735Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    IEEE Std 1609.2-2016 (2016) Intelligent transportation systems committee and others. IEEE standard for wireless access in vehicular environments–security services for applications and management messagesGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kerry CF, Gallagher PD (2013) Digital signature standard (DSS). FIPS PUB 186-4Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Knežević M, Nikov V, Rombouts P (2016) Low-latency ECDSA signature verification a road toward safer traffic. IEEE Trans Very Large Scale Integr VLSI Syst 24(11):3257–3267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Choi P, Lee M-K, Kim J-H, Kim DK (2017) Low-complexity elliptic curve cryptography processor based on configurable partial modular reduction over NIST prime fields. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst II Express Briefs 65:1703–1707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Liu Z, Huang X, Hu Z, Khan MK, Seo H, Zhou L (2017) On emerging family of elliptic curves to secure internet of things: ECC comes of age. IEEE Trans Dependable Secure Comput 14(3):237–248Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fernandes B, Rufino J, Alam M, Ferreira J (2018) Implementation and analysis of IEEE and ETSI security standards for vehicular communications. Mob Netw Appl 23(3):469–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Imem AA (2015) Comparison and evaluation of digital signature schemes employed in NDN network. arXiv preprint arXiv:1508.00184
  33. 33.
    Dai J, Pu L, Xu K, Meng Z, Liu Z, Zhang L (2017) The implementation and performance evaluation of wave based secured vehicular communication system. In: 2017 IEEE 85th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring), pp 1–5Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Chen C, Lee SW, Watson T, Maple C, Lu Y (2017) CAESAR: a criticality-aware ECDSA signature verification scheme with Markov model. In: 2017 IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference (VNC), pp 151–154. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stone JE, Gohara D, Shi G (2010) OpenCL: a parallel programming standard for heterogeneous computing systems. Comput Sci Eng 12(3):66–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Park Y-H, Seo S-W (2015) Fast and secure group key dissemination scheme for out-of-range V2I communication. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 64(12):5642–5652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Böhm A, Lidström K, Jonsson M, Larsson T (2010) Evaluating CALM M5-based vehicle-to-vehicle communication in various road settings through field trials. In: 2010 IEEE 35th Conference on Local Computer Networks (LCN). IEEE, pp 613–620Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Song Y-S, Choi H-K (2017) Analysis of V2V broadcast performance limit for WAVE communication systems using two-ray path loss model. ETRI J 39(2):213–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Banani S, Gordon S, Thiemjarus S, Kittipiyakul S (2018) Verifying safety messages using relative-time and zone priority in vehicular ad-hoc networks. Sensors 18(4):1195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
  41. 41.
    Savari. Savari SW-1000 road-side-unit (RSU) datasheet. http://www.econolitegroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/RSU-Econolite.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2018
  42. 42.
  43. 43.
  44. 44.
    Brown M, Hankerson D, López J, Menezes A (2001) Software implementation of the NIST elliptic curves over prime fields. In: Cryptographers Track at the RSA Conference. Springer, pp 250–265Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Avanzi RM (2004) Aspects of hyperelliptic curves over large prime fields in software implementations. In: International Workshop on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems. Springer, pp 148–162Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bernstein DJ (2006) Curve25519: new Diffie–Hellman speed records. In: International Workshop on Public Key Cryptography. Springer, pp 207–228Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Giorgi P, Izard T, Tisserand A (2009) Comparison of modular arithmetic algorithms on GPUs. In: ParCo’09: International Conference on Parallel ComputingGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Güneysu T, Paar C (2008) Ultra high performance ECC over NIST primes on commercial FPGAs. In: International Workshop on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems. Springer, pp 62–78Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ma Y, Liu Z, Pan W, Jing J (2013) A high-speed elliptic curve cryptographic processor for generic curves over \(gf(p)\). In: International Conference on Selected Areas in Cryptography. Springer, pp 421–437Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of computingKAISTDaejeonKorea
  2. 2.Department of ITHansung UniversitySeoulKorea
  3. 3.Information Security Research DivisionETRIDaejeonKorea

Personalised recommendations