Paper 2026/2707
Poly Versus Polyval
Abstract
We revisit the basic construction of polynomial evaluation based hash function, which we call Poly, over binary extension fields $GF(2^n)$, where $n=64k$ and $k\geq 2$. Unlike GHASH, the NIST standard polynomial evaluation based hash function for $n=128$, Poly does not perform the unnecessary bit reversals of each $n$-bit block, and consequently is faster than GHASH. Further, Poly differs from Polyval, -- a faster alternative to GHASH, -- in that Poly performs usual reduction, while Polyval performs Montgomery reduction. We identify suitable choices of the field representing irreducible polynomials which make usual and Montgomery reductions efficient. We provide detailed algorithms, and associated proofs of correctness for both kinds of reductions. Based on the algorithms, we report carefully optimised assembly implementation of both Poly and Polyval for $n=128,256$ and $512$. Our theoretical analysis and experimental timing results show that for $n=128$, Polyval is faster than Poly, while for $n=256$ and $512$ (as well as for higher values of $n$), Poly is faster than Polyval. The cases $n=128$ and $n=256$ are of current relevance due to the ongoing NIST process for developing cryptographic accordions.
Metadata
- Available format(s)
-
PDF
- Category
- Secret-key cryptography
- Publication info
- Preprint.
- Keywords
- almost XOR universalpolynomial hashingPolyPolyvalGHASHcryptographic accordionsassembly implementation
- Contact author(s)
-
kaushik nath @ yahoo in
palash @ isical ac in - History
- 2026-11-04: approved
- 2026-10-31: received
- See all versions
- Short URL
- https://ia.cr/2026/2707
- License
-
CC BY
BibTeX
@misc{cryptoeprint:2026/2707,
author = {Kaushik Nath and Palash Sarkar},
title = {Poly Versus Polyval},
howpublished = {Cryptology {ePrint} Archive, Paper 2026/2707},
year = {2026},
url = {https://eprint.iacr.org/2026/2707}
}