(IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,

Vol. 8, No. 6, 2017

Cryptography: A Comparative Analysis for Modern

Techniques
Faiqa Maqsood1 Muhammad Mumtaz Ali3
Dept. Computer Science & Information Technology Dept. Computer Science & Information Technology
Superior University Superior University
Lahore, Pakistan Lahore, Pakistan

Muhammad Ahmed 2 Munam Ali Shah4

Dept. Computer Science & Information Technology Dept. Computer Science
Superior University COMSATS Institute of Information Technology
Lahore, Pakistan Islamabad, Pakistan

Abstract—Cryptography plays a vital role for ensuring secure secret key, whereas asymmetric cryptography (also called
communication between multiple entities. In many contemporary public key cryptography) secures communication by using
studies, researchers contributed towards identifying best public and private keys [5], [6]. Private key is hold individually
cryptography mechanisms in terms of their performance results. in communication while public key is known to everyone due
Selection of cryptographic technique according to a particular to public nature. Fig. 2 and 3 shows the symmetric and
context is a big question; to answer this question, many existing asymmetric cryptography, respectively.
studies have claimed that technique selection is purely dependent
on desired quality attributes such as efficiency and security. It To secure the communication, key size is the most
has been identified that existing reviews are either focused only important parameter in symmetric and symmetric
towards symmetric or asymmetric encryption types. Another cryptography. The key size of symmetric cryptography is less
limitation is found that a criterion for performance comparisons than the asymmetric cryptography which make symmetric
only covers common parameters. In this paper, we have cryptography less secure for more sensitive data [7], [8].
evaluated the performance of different symmetric and
asymmetric algorithms by covering multiple parameters such as
encryption/decryption time, key generation time and file size. For
evaluation purpose, we have performed simulations in a sample
context in which multiple cryptography algorithms have been
compared. Simulation results are visualized in a way that clearly
depicts which algorithm is most suitable while achieving a
particular quality attribute.

Keywords—Cryptography; symmetric; asymmetric; encryption;

decryption
Fig. 1. Working of encryption and decryption.
I. INTRODUCTION
Cryptography is the art of secret writing which is used The computational time of asymmetric cryptography is
since Roman times to hide information secret or greater than the symmetric cryptography which makes
keeping message secure. To keep information secret, a widely- encryption/decryption more complex for a large amount of data
used method is an encryption/decryption. Basically, [9], [10]. Due to larger key size and greater computational time
encryption/decryption are the fundamental functions of of asymmetric cryptography, public key cryptography is used
cryptography. In encryption, a simple message (plain text) is once for key exchange only and further encryption/ decryption
converted into unreadable form called ciphertext. While in is done by symmetric key cryptography [11], [12].
decryption, a ciphertext is converted into the original text The computational time of cryptography techniques is
(plaintext). Both of these functions are used to secure message further classified as encryption/decryption time, key
against who is not authorized to view the message contents [1]- generation, and key exchange time. Encryption/decryption time
[3]. The simple working of encryption and decryption is calculated by converting a plaintext (message) into
functions is shown in Fig. 1. ciphertext and vice versa [13], [14]. Key generation time is
Symmetric and asymmetric are widely accepted types of depending on the size of key length which is different for
cryptography [4] in which symmetric (also called symmetric symmetric and asymmetric cryptography. Key exchange time
key cryptography) is focused towards ensuring secure is depending on the communication channel between sender
communication between sender and receiver by using same and receiver [15], [16].

442 | P a g e
www.ijacsa.thesai.org
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 8, No. 6, 2017

evaluation parameters such as encryption/decryption time, and

key generation time.
The rest of the paper is organized as: Section II discussed
existing state of the art cryptographic schemes. Performance
evaluation and results discussion of cryptographic schemes is
presented in Section III. Section IV concludes the paper and
future work.
Fig. 2. Symmetric Cryptography II. LITERATURE REVIEW
There are many cryptography algorithms used to secure
information such as DES, 3DES, Blowfish, AES, RSA,
ElGamal and Paillier [2]. All of these algorithms are unique on
it’s way. However, the problem is that how to find the best
security algorithm which provides the high security and also
take less time for a key generation, encryption, and decryption
of information. Security algorithms will depend on pros and
cons of each algorithm, requirement and suitable for different
application [25], [32], [33].
Fig. 3. Asymmetric cryptography.
In paper [7], it has been evaluated that performance of two
There are designed many cryptographic algorithms used for algorithms DES and Blowfish on basis of certain parameters
encryption and decryption [17], [18]. As we already described, such as encryption speed, power consumption, and security
the cryptography schemes are classified as symmetric and analysis. Experiment result showed that performance of
asymmetric algorithms. In our paper, symmetric algorithms Blowfish is fastest than DES and AES algorithm [34].
include but not limited; DES (Data Encryption Standard), However, in [35] results showed that AES performance is
3DES (Triple Data Encryption Standard), AES (Advanced good than Blowfish.
Encryption Standard). Asymmetric algorithms include RSA In [18] some of the cryptography algorithms details are
(Rivest, Shamir and Adleman), Elgamal, and ECC (Elliptic given such as AES, DES, 3DES, RC6, Blowfish and RC2.
Curve Cryptography) [19]. Fig. 4 describes the taxonomy of Furthermore, the performance of these security algorithms is
cryptography techniques. also evaluated and experiment is performed on text file and
image. The result is showed that all algorithms slow in
performance as compare to Blowfish as increased the packet
size. However, selecting the image as the type of data instead
of text file then Blowfish, RC6, and RC2 the algorithm has
consumed more time than AES, DES and 3DES algorithms.
The result showed that DES is still faster in performance than
3DES [18].
In this paper, [36] take the different size of a file for
performance evaluation of cryptography algorithm. The
experiment is performed on single processor and cloud
computing. The result is proved that cryptography algorithm
works faster in cloud computing than a single processor
computer. AES with small input file has highest Speed up
ratio, MD5 the least while RSA is the most time-consuming
[36]. In author [37] evaluated the performance of different
cryptography algorithms such as DES, AES, and 3DES to find
Fig. 4. Taxonomy of cryptography techniques. the encryption and decryption time and throughput for different
hardware. These algorithms are used to calculate the time of
In this paper, we describe the literature review of the encryption. Encryption time is increasing as when the size of
cryptographic schemes including symmetric and asymmetric. data increases. Therefore, the speed of encryption increase
We also evaluate the performance of described cryptographic depends on file (in bytes) not on the data type of a file [38].
systems on different file sizes. Performance analysis shows that The throughput of 3DES has less as compare to AES, text files
the asymmetric algorithms take much time for encryption and and images used for performance evaluation [39]. Dot net
decryption as compare to symmetric algorithms. frame used for implementation of DES 3DES that take more
processing time as compare to AES algorithm [37]. Only a
The main objective of this paper is to provide the single parameter is used to measure the encryption time. For
performance evaluation of cryptographic schemes including future work of this paper is measure the encryption time by
symmetric and asymmetric algorithms. We use different using the different parameter.

443 | P a g e
www.ijacsa.thesai.org
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 8, No. 6, 2017

DES performance is not faster for software use. However, perform encryption/decryption, the sender and receiver
the performance of DES is faster on hardware [40] [12]. The must have the same key. The DES performs encryption
performance of AES, DES, and Blowfish has been evaluated on a block of 64-bit [13]. The DES algorithm is most
by using different size of text file in term of encryption and widely used in many applications [21] and some
decryption speed. Future work of this paper shows better result popular use in military, commercial, and security of
by using the better simulator for implementation [41]. In this communication system [7], same as DES but key size is
paper [42], RSA, DES and AES are discussed. Analyses are different from DES. The key size of 3DES is 168 bit.
performed on the basis of some parameter such as usage of The 3DES algorithm performs operation three times on
memory, computation time and output byte. Text file used for each block of data. It is slower than DES [22].
evaluation and implementation of result which showed that
DES and AES are the minor difference for file encryption time  AES (Advanced Encryption Standard): AES stands for
while encryption time of RSA is longest and also consumed the Advanced Encryption Standard which is the
high memory. advancement of 3DES algorithm [23]. It was introduced
in 1997 by the NIST (National Institute of Standards
Mobile client and server used for evaluating the and Technology). Basically, AES is based on the
performance of RSA and ECC cryptography algorithm [43]. Rijndael cipher developed by two cryptographers, Joan
WTLS (Wireless Transport Layer Security) security protocol is Daemen and Vincent Rijmen. AES is different from
used for performance evaluation. In experiment, the result DES and 3DES due to variables key sizes such as 128,
showed that RSA is faster for client side but performance is 192, and 256 bits [21]. Same like DES and 3DES, AES
slow at the server side as compare to ECC (Elliptic Curve also performs encryption on blocks which are 128-bit
Cryptosystem) performance. RSA, ElGamal and Paillier have [13]. AES algorithm use in small devices for encrypting
been used for performance evaluation based on a parameter a message to send over a network. Some other
such as the encrypted file size, decrypted file size, encryption applications are monetary transaction [24] and security
time, decryption time and throughput. Experimental result applications [15] [25].
showed that encryption time of RSA is better than ElGamal but
decryption time of ElGamal is better as compared to RSA. B. Asymmetric Cryptography
Result also showed that throughput of RSA encryption process Asymmetric cryptography is also in the category of
is better and throughput in the decryption process of ElGamal cryptography schemes. Unlike symmetric cryptography, two
performance is better than RSA. Overall performance keys are used: one is public and second is private. The public
according to the chosen parameter RSA is better than all other key is shared by anyone in the cryptographic system while the
two algorithms paillier and ElGamal [29]. private key is kept secret by authenticated user. Followings are
the asymmetric cryptography algorithms.
In [44] paper analysis is performed and RSA with different
key size and word length variable in term of encryption and  RSA (Rivest, Shamir and Adleman): RSA stands for
decryption process require memory size and execution time. Rivest, Shamir and Adleman who introduced the RSA
Experiment result showed that RSA execution time is slow and algorithm in 1977 [26]. RSA is an asymmetric
need more memory requirement as compare to ECC. Key cryptographic algorithm [2] which is also used for
agreement and key distribution is the main problem in DES encryption and decryption of the message. RSA is
algorithm but in RSA encryption and decryption, both widely used in transferring of keys over an insecure
operations consume more time. The result showed in a channel. Due to asymmetric nature, there are two keys
simulation that RSA is slower in performance than DES and used in the algorithm. One is public key and second is a
evaluated that RSA algorithm throughput of is not better than private key. The public key is openly accessible to
DES algorithm. In this paper, simulation result showed that everyone in the cryptosystem and the private key is kept
power consumption and throughput of DES algorithm is much secret by authorized person. RSA provides
better than another algorithm [45]. confidentiality, integrity, authenticity, and non-
repudiation of data [27 ] [23]. RSA is more commonly
III. STATE OF THE ART OF CRYPTOGRAPHY SCHEMES used in electronic industry for online money transfer
A. Symmetric Cryptography [19]. In future, RSA can be used in Java cards [28].
Symmetric cryptography is placed in the category of  ElGamal: ElGamal algorithm was introduced in 1985
cryptography schemes in which a shared key is used to convert by Taher ElGamal [29]. ElGamal is an asymmetric key
a plaintext into cipher text. A same secret key is shared by both encryption algorithm that is based on the Diffie-Helman
sender and receiver. Followings are the symmetric key exchange as an alternative to RSA for public key
cryptography schemes. encryption. ElGamal is also used in digital signature
generation algorithm called ElGamal signature scheme
 DES (Data Encryption Standard): DES stands for Data [20][30][31]. A homomorphic algorithm named paillier
Encryption Standard. DES introduced in early 1970 at used for its semantic security [6].
IBM. The early design of DES is based on Horst
Feistel. DES is a symmetric cryptographic algorithm  ECC (Elliptic Curve Cryptography): ECC stands for
used for encryption and decryption of message [20]. In Elliptic Curve Cryptography. ECC introduced in 1985
DES, only one secret key is used for both encryption by Neal Koblitz and Victor S. Miller. ECC lies in the
and decryption. The key size of DES is 56-bit. To category of the asymmetric scheme that is based on

444 | P a g e
www.ijacsa.thesai.org
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 8, No. 6, 2017

elliptic curves. The applications of ECC are encryption, TABLE. II. FILE SIZE WITH THEIR ENCRYPTION AND DECRYPTION TIMES
digital signatures and pseudo-random generators [32].
Decryption
IV. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Cryptography File size Encryption Time
Time (in
Algorithms (kilo bytes) (in Seconds)
Seconds)
In this section, we present experimental setup and
experimental results of symmetric and asymmetric algorithms. 32 0.27 0.44
126 0.83 0.65
A. Experimental Setup
DES 200 1.19 0.85
The algorithms are implemented using the Java (Eclipse
246 1.44 1.23
Platform Version: 3.3.1.1) Experiments are performed on Intel
Pentium processor with a 2.34 GHz and 1 GB of memory. We 280 1.67 1.45
used different size of text files in our experiments such as 32 32 0.15 0.15
KB, 126 KB, 200 KB, 246 KB and 280 KB. 126 0.46 0.44
B. Experimental Result AES 200 0.72 0.63
We evaluate the performance of symmetric and asymmetric 246 0.95 0.83
algorithms by using parameters such as encryption time, 280 1.12 1.10
decryption time and key generation time. Symmetric 32 0.13 0.15
algorithms include DES and AES while asymmetric algorithms 126 0.52 0.43
include RSA and ElGamal.
RSA 200 0.74 0.66
Encryption time is the time required by any encryption 246 1.11 0.93
function to convert plaintext into ciphertext [44]. Decryption 280 1.39 1.23
time is the time required to convert again cipher text into plain
text. Similarly, key generation time is the time taken by key 32 0.45 0.43
generation function to generate keys. All these functions 126 1.03 0.85
generate different times according to the size of text files and ElGamal 200 1.41 1.13
key length in any algorithm. Table 1 shows the generation time 246 1.75 1.30
of symmetric and asymmetric keys. 280 1.83 1.64

TABLE. I. KEY SIZES WITH THEIR GENERATION TIME D. Asymmetric Algorithms

Generation In this section, we analyzed the performance of asymmetric
Key Size
Cryptography Algorithms
(bits)
Time algorithms in term of encryption and decryption time. Fig. 7
(milliseconds) shows the encryption time of RSA and ElGamal algorithms
DES 56 29 ms performed on different file sizes. It is obvious from the Fig. 7
Symmetric
AES 128 75 ms that the encryption time of RSA algorithm is lower than
RSA 1024 287 ms comparing to ElGamal algorithm.
Asymmetric
ElGamal 160 86 ms
In Fig. 8, the performance results show that the decryption
C. Symmetric Cryptography time of RSA is also lower than the decryption time of
In this section, we analyzed the encryption and decryption ElGamal. To conclude, the performance of RSA algorithm in
time of symmetric algorithms. Fig. 5 shows the encryption time the context of encryption/decryption time is much better than
of DES and AES algorithms performed on different file sizes. the ElGamal algorithm.
It is obvious from the Fig.5 that the encryption time of AES E. Symmetric and Asymmetric Algorithms
algorithm is lower than comparing to DES algorithm.
In this section, we analyzed the performance of symmetric
In Fig. 6, the performance results show that the decryption and asymmetric cryptographic algorithms in term of
time of AES is also lower than the decryption time of DES. To encryption/decryption time and key generation time.
conclude, the performance of AES algorithm in the context of
encryption/decryption time is much better than the DES  Encryption Time: Fig. 9 shows the encryption time of
algorithm. DES, AES, RSA, ElGamal on different file sizes. It is
clear from the figure that encryption time of DES
Table 2 shows the encryption and decryption time of algorithm is more than all other schemes such as AES,
symmetric and asymmetric algorithms with their different file RSA, and ElGamal. The RSA encryption time is less
sizes. Performance results show that when we increase the size than all other schemes. To conclude that, the encryption
of text files, the encryption and decryption time is also time of asymmetric algorithms is less than the
increased. symmetric algorithms.

445 | P a g e
www.ijacsa.thesai.org
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 8, No. 6, 2017

 Decryption Time: Fig. 10 shows the decryption time of

DES, AES, RSA, ElGamal on different file sizes. The
decryption time of RSA algorithm is much than all
other schemes such as DES, AES, and ElGamal.
 Key Generation Time: Fig. 11 shows the key generation
time of symmetric and asymmetric algorithms. Key
generation time is depending on the bit length of a key.
The more in length, the increase in time. The RSA
algorithm takes more time to generate the key because
of key length 1024 bits while DES algorithm takes less
time because of key length 56 bits.

Fig. 7. Encryption Time (RSA and ElGmal).

Fig. 5. Encryption Time (AES and DES).

Fig. 8. Decryption Time (RSA and ElGmal).

Fig. 9. Encryption Time (DES, AES, ElGmal and RSA).

Fig. 6. Decryption Time (AES and DES).

446 | P a g e
www.ijacsa.thesai.org
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 8, No. 6, 2017

[6] S. Farah, M. Y. Javed, A. Shamim, and T. Nawaz, “An experimental

study on Performance Evaluation of Asymmetric Encryption
Algorithms,” Recent advaces Inf. Sci., vol. 8, pp. 121–124, 2012.
[7] R. Tripathi and S. Agrawal, “Comparative Study of Symmetric and
Asymmetric Cryptography Techniques,” Int. J. Adv. Found. Res.
Comput., vol. 1, no. 6, pp. 68–76, 2014.
[8] B. Padmavathi and S. R. Kumari, “A Survey on Performance Analysis
of DES , AES and RSA Algorithm along with LSB Substitution
Technique,” Int. J. Sci. Res., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 170–174, 2013.
[9] G. Singh, “A Study of Encryption Algorithms (RSA, DES, 3DES and
AES) for Information Security,” Int. J. Comput. Appl., vol. 67, no. 19,
pp. 975–8887, 2013.
[10] A. Patil and R. Goudar, “A Comparative Survey Of Symmetric
Encryption Techniques For Wireless Devices,” Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res.,
vol. 2, no. 8, pp. 61–65, 2013.
[11] C. Science and M. Studies, “An Efficient Password Security Mechanism
Using Two Server Authentication and Key Exchange,” pp. 50–53, 2015.
[12] A. Levi and E. Savas, “Performance evaluation of public-key
cryptosystem operations in WTLS protocol,” Proc. - IEEE Symp.
Fig. 10. Decryption Time (DES, AES, ElGmal and RSA). Comput. Commun., pp. 1245–1250, 2003.
[13] S. S. and K. Annapoorna Shetty, “A Review on Asymmetric
Cryptography – RSA and ElGamal Algorithm,” Int. J. Innov. Res.
Comput. Commun. Eng., vol. 2, no. Special issue 5, p. 98, 2014.
[14] T. Nie, C. Song, and X. Zhi, “Performance evaluation of DES and
Blowfish algorithms,” 2010 Int. Conf. Biomed. Eng. Comput. Sci.
ICBECS 2010, 2010.
[15] D. Elminaam, “Performance evaluation of symmetric encryption
algorithms,” Int. J. Comput. Networks, vol. 8, no. 12, pp. 280–286,
2008.
[16] A. S. Wander, N. Gura, H. Eberle, V. Gupta, and S. C. Shantz, “Energy
Analysis of Public-Key Cryptography on Small Wireless Devices,”
Third IEEE Int. Conf. Pervasive Comput. Commun., p. 3, 2005.
[17] S. Singh and R. Maini, “Comparison of data encryption algorithms,” Int.
J. Comput. Sci. …, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 125–127, 2011.
[18] D. Li, Y. Wang, and H. Chen, “The research on key generation in RSA
public-key cryptosystem,” Proc. - 4th Int. Conf. Comput. Inf. Sci. ICCIS
2012, pp. 578–580, 2012.
Fig. 11. Key Generation Key (DES, AES, ElGmal and RSA). [19] H. Mathur and P. Z. Alam, “Cryptology Algorithm,” Int. J. Elmerging
Trends Technol. Comput. Sci., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 4–6, 2015.
V. CONCLUSION [20] D. Sukhija, “Performance Evaluation of Cryptographic Algorithms :
AES and DES,” vol. 3, no. 9, pp. 582–585, 2014.
In this work, we analyzed the performance of symmetric [21] M. Panda, “Performance Analysis of Encryption Algorithms for
and asymmetric cryptography schemes. We used encryption Security,” pp. 840–844, 2016.
time, decryption time and key generation time to evaluate the [22] E. Barker, A. Roginsky, G. Locke, and P. Gallagher, “Transitions:
cryptographic schemes. The performance results show that the Recommendation for Transitioning the Use of Cryptographic
symmetric schemes are computationally inexpensive when Algorithms and Key Lengths,” NIST Spec. Publ., no. January, pp. 800–
131, 2011.
compared with asymmetric schemes. The key generation time
is depending on the key length of bits. In future, we plan to [23] H. O. Alanazi, B. B. Zaidan, a. a. Zaidan, H. a. Jalab, M. Shabbir, and
Y. Al-Nabhani, “New Comparative Study Between DES, 3DES and
elaborate more symmetric and asymmetric schemes and extend AES within Nine Factors,” J. Comput., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 2151–9617,
our performance analysis results. 2010.
REFERENCES [24] A. K. Mandal and C. Parakash, “Performance Evaluation of
Cryptographic Algorithms : DES and AES,” 2012.
[1] Jitendra Singh Chauhan and S. K. Sharma, “A Comparative Study of
Cryptographic Algorithms,” Int. J. Innov. Res., pp. 24–28, 2015. [25] A. Sterbenz and P. Lipp, “Performance of the {AES} Candidate
Algorithms in {Java},” Third {Advanced Encryption Stand. Candidate
[2] A. Al Hasib and A. A. M. M. Haque, “A comparative study of the Conf. April 13--14, 2000, New York, NY, USA, pp. 161–168, 2000.
performance and security issues of AES and RSA cryptography,” Proc. -
3rd Int. Conf. Converg. Hybrid Inf. Technol. ICCIT 2008, vol. 2, no. [26] R. L. Rivest, A. Shamir, and L. Adleman “A Method for Obtaining
November 2001, pp. 505–510, 2008. Digital Signatures and Public- Key Cryptosystems.” Communications of
the ACM, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 96–99, 1983.
[3] C. Narasimham and J. Pradhan, “Evaluation of Performance
Characteristics of Cryptosystem Using Text Files.,” J. Theor. Appl. Inf. [27] M. E. Student, “Algorithms for Secure Cloud,” vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 1–9,
Technol., vol. 4, no. 1, 2008. 2014.
[4] M. Mikhail, Y. Abouelseoud, and G. Elkobrosy, “Extension and [28] G. Bernabé and N. Clarke “Study of RSA Performance in Java Cards,”
Application of El-Gamal Encryption Scheme,” 2014. 2013 .
[5] A. Naureen, A. Akram, T. Maqsood, R. Riaz, K. H. Kim, and H. F. [29] P. Nalwaya, V. P. Saxena, and P. Nalwaya, “A cryptographic approach
Ahmed, “Performance and security assessment of a PKC based key based on integrating running key in feedback mode of elgamal system,”
management scheme for hierarchical sensor networks,” IEEE Veh. Proc. - 2014 6th Int. Conf. Comput. Intell. Commun. Networks, CICN
Technol. Conf., pp. 163–167, 2008. 2014, pp. 719–724, 2014.

447 | P a g e
www.ijacsa.thesai.org
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 8, No. 6, 2017

[30] X. Li, X. Shen, and H. Chen, “ElGamal digital signature algorithm of comparison of symmetric key cryptographic algorithms based on various
adding a random number,” J. Networks, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 774–782, 2011. file features,” International Journal of Network Security & Its
[31] H. Chen and J. Lin, “Digital Signature Scheme,” 2009. Applications, vol. 6, no. 4, 2014.
[32] M. S. Anoop, “Elliptic Curve Cryptography,” Infosecwriters, pp. 1–11, [39] S. Kansal and M. Mittal, “Performance evaluation of various symmetric
2015. encryption algorithms,” in Parallel, Distributed and Grid Computing
(PDGC), 2014 International Conference on. IEEE, 2014, pp. 105–109.
[33] R. H. Rathod and C. Dhote, “Comparison of symmetric key encryption
algorithms,” International Journal of Research in Information [40] S. Soni, H. Agrawal, and M. Sharma, “Analysis and comparison
Technology (IJRIT), 2014. between aes and des cryptographic algorithm,” International Journal of
Engineering and Innovative Technology, vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 362–365,
[34] O. Verma, R. Agarwal, D. Dafouti, and S. Tyagi, “Peformance analysis 2012.
of data encryption algorithms,” in Electronics Computer Technology
(ICECT), 2011 3rd International Conference on, vol. 5. IEEE, 2011, pp. [41] J Thakur and N. Kumar, “Des, aes and blowfish: Symmetric key
399–403. cryptography algorithms simulation based performance analysis,”
International journal of emerging technology and advanced engineering,
[35] A. Jeeva, D. V. Palanisamy, and K. Kanagaram, “Comparative analysis vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 6–12, 2011.
of performance efficiency and security measures of some
encryptionalgorithms,” International Journal of Engineering Research [42] S. M. Seth and R. Mishra, “Comparative analysis of encryption
and Applications (IJERA) ISSN, pp. 2248–9622, 2012. algorithms for data communication 1,” IJCST, vol. 2, 2011.
[36] P. Arora, A. Singh, and H. Tyagi, “Evaluation and comparison of [43] A. Levi and E. Savas, “Performance evaluation of public-key
security issues on cloud computing environment,” World of Computer cryptosystem operations in wtls protocol,” in Computers and
Science and Information Technology Journal (WCSIT), vol. 2, no. 5, pp. Communication, 2003.(ISCC 2003). Proceedings. Eighth IEEE
179–183, 2012. International Symposium on. IEEE, 2003, pp. 1245–1250.
[37] M. Mittal, “Performance evaluation of cryptographic algorithms,” [44] K. B. R. P.R.Vijayalakshmi, “Performance analysis of rsa and ecc in
International Journal of Computer Applications, vol. 41, no. 7, pp. 1–6, identity-based authenticated new multiparty key agreement protocol,”
2012. International Conference on Computing, Communication and
Applications (ICCCA), 2012.
[38] R. Masram, V. Shahare, J. Abraham, and R. Moona, “Analysis and
[45] A. Aman, J. Attri, A. Devi, and P. Sharma, “Comparative analysis
between des and rsa algorithms,” International Journal of Advanced
Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering, 2012.

448 | P a g e
www.ijacsa.thesai.org