In what cases might PRESENT be implemented as encryption-only?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












In the paper, under section 4.1 Goals and environment of use we read:



In applications that demand the most efficient use of space, the block cipher will often only be implemented as encryption-only.



I presume this is NOT the same as one-way encryption (perhaps I should say hash?) as used for passwords.



  1. So in what cases might we need only encryption but not decryption? It seems strange we would encrypt something that does not need decrypting at some point.

Furthermore, the quote above continues with ...



In this way it can be used in challenge-response authentication protocols and, with some careful management, it could be used for both encryption and decryption ...



This just added to my confusion.



  1. It seems PRESENT can decrypt a ciphertext by running it in reverse. So why the need for some careful management for PRESENT to be used for both encryption and decryption?









share|improve this question





















  • in CTR mode only encryption
    – kelalaka
    2 hours ago














up vote
1
down vote

favorite












In the paper, under section 4.1 Goals and environment of use we read:



In applications that demand the most efficient use of space, the block cipher will often only be implemented as encryption-only.



I presume this is NOT the same as one-way encryption (perhaps I should say hash?) as used for passwords.



  1. So in what cases might we need only encryption but not decryption? It seems strange we would encrypt something that does not need decrypting at some point.

Furthermore, the quote above continues with ...



In this way it can be used in challenge-response authentication protocols and, with some careful management, it could be used for both encryption and decryption ...



This just added to my confusion.



  1. It seems PRESENT can decrypt a ciphertext by running it in reverse. So why the need for some careful management for PRESENT to be used for both encryption and decryption?









share|improve this question





















  • in CTR mode only encryption
    – kelalaka
    2 hours ago












up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











In the paper, under section 4.1 Goals and environment of use we read:



In applications that demand the most efficient use of space, the block cipher will often only be implemented as encryption-only.



I presume this is NOT the same as one-way encryption (perhaps I should say hash?) as used for passwords.



  1. So in what cases might we need only encryption but not decryption? It seems strange we would encrypt something that does not need decrypting at some point.

Furthermore, the quote above continues with ...



In this way it can be used in challenge-response authentication protocols and, with some careful management, it could be used for both encryption and decryption ...



This just added to my confusion.



  1. It seems PRESENT can decrypt a ciphertext by running it in reverse. So why the need for some careful management for PRESENT to be used for both encryption and decryption?









share|improve this question













In the paper, under section 4.1 Goals and environment of use we read:



In applications that demand the most efficient use of space, the block cipher will often only be implemented as encryption-only.



I presume this is NOT the same as one-way encryption (perhaps I should say hash?) as used for passwords.



  1. So in what cases might we need only encryption but not decryption? It seems strange we would encrypt something that does not need decrypting at some point.

Furthermore, the quote above continues with ...



In this way it can be used in challenge-response authentication protocols and, with some careful management, it could be used for both encryption and decryption ...



This just added to my confusion.



  1. It seems PRESENT can decrypt a ciphertext by running it in reverse. So why the need for some careful management for PRESENT to be used for both encryption and decryption?






symmetric authenticated-encryption lightweight present






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 2 hours ago









Red Book 1

424414




424414











  • in CTR mode only encryption
    – kelalaka
    2 hours ago
















  • in CTR mode only encryption
    – kelalaka
    2 hours ago















in CTR mode only encryption
– kelalaka
2 hours ago




in CTR mode only encryption
– kelalaka
2 hours ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote



accepted











  1. So in what cases might we need only encryption but not decryption? It seems strange we would encrypt something that does not need decrypting at some point.



For example, the CTR mode uses only Encryption, and CFB, OFB.




  1. It seems PRESENT can decrypt a ciphertext by running it in reverse. So why the need for some careful management for PRESENT to be used for both encryption and decryption?



The correct sentence is




In this way it can be used within challenge-response authentication protocols and, with some careful state management.




All about the hardware implementation of PRESENT.



This paragraph from the article;




Encryption and decryption with present have roughly the same physical requirements. Opting to support both encryption and decryption will result in a lightweight block cipher implementation that is still smaller than an encryption-only AES. Opting to implement an encryption only present will give an ultra-lightweight solution. The encryption subkeys can be computed on-the-fly.




So they compare their encryption and decryption supported hardware implementation to encryption-only AES claiming that PRESENT has smaller requirements.






share|improve this answer





























    up vote
    1
    down vote













    Ciphers that are targeted for light-weight applications often have some common, but one-off, use cases. I have an IC with and ADC that is passively powered via RFID, and then sends encrypted data via SIMON. There's no commands required, so it is strictly one-way. I illuminate the IC electrically, and then it sends me a sample from the sensor. PRESENT is also used for applications like this, but I've never personally implemented it.






    share|improve this answer



























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      A bona fide use case for encryption only is inside a true random number generator (TRNG). If you have something small like:-



      trng



      it's common to whiten the raw entropy signal using a cryptographic primitive. PRESENT could be used in some form of CFB mode, although there are examples of vanilla ECB mode being used. The designers of these simple key type TRNGs often fail to appreciate the nuances of modes of operation and their consequences. So you'd effectively encrypt the output signal with no requirement to ever decrypt. The key would probably be fixed, rather than intermittently cycled around.



      PRESENT has small resource requirements so would be a valid solution.




      This image is only a representative example of the form factor.






      share|improve this answer




















        Your Answer




        StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
        return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
        StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
        StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
        );
        );
        , "mathjax-editing");

        StackExchange.ready(function()
        var channelOptions =
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "281"
        ;
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
        createEditor();
        );

        else
        createEditor();

        );

        function createEditor()
        StackExchange.prepareEditor(
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        convertImagesToLinks: false,
        noModals: false,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: null,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        );



        );













         

        draft saved


        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function ()
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcrypto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f63409%2fin-what-cases-might-present-be-implemented-as-encryption-only%23new-answer', 'question_page');

        );

        Post as a guest






























        3 Answers
        3






        active

        oldest

        votes








        3 Answers
        3






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes








        up vote
        1
        down vote



        accepted











        1. So in what cases might we need only encryption but not decryption? It seems strange we would encrypt something that does not need decrypting at some point.



        For example, the CTR mode uses only Encryption, and CFB, OFB.




        1. It seems PRESENT can decrypt a ciphertext by running it in reverse. So why the need for some careful management for PRESENT to be used for both encryption and decryption?



        The correct sentence is




        In this way it can be used within challenge-response authentication protocols and, with some careful state management.




        All about the hardware implementation of PRESENT.



        This paragraph from the article;




        Encryption and decryption with present have roughly the same physical requirements. Opting to support both encryption and decryption will result in a lightweight block cipher implementation that is still smaller than an encryption-only AES. Opting to implement an encryption only present will give an ultra-lightweight solution. The encryption subkeys can be computed on-the-fly.




        So they compare their encryption and decryption supported hardware implementation to encryption-only AES claiming that PRESENT has smaller requirements.






        share|improve this answer


























          up vote
          1
          down vote



          accepted











          1. So in what cases might we need only encryption but not decryption? It seems strange we would encrypt something that does not need decrypting at some point.



          For example, the CTR mode uses only Encryption, and CFB, OFB.




          1. It seems PRESENT can decrypt a ciphertext by running it in reverse. So why the need for some careful management for PRESENT to be used for both encryption and decryption?



          The correct sentence is




          In this way it can be used within challenge-response authentication protocols and, with some careful state management.




          All about the hardware implementation of PRESENT.



          This paragraph from the article;




          Encryption and decryption with present have roughly the same physical requirements. Opting to support both encryption and decryption will result in a lightweight block cipher implementation that is still smaller than an encryption-only AES. Opting to implement an encryption only present will give an ultra-lightweight solution. The encryption subkeys can be computed on-the-fly.




          So they compare their encryption and decryption supported hardware implementation to encryption-only AES claiming that PRESENT has smaller requirements.






          share|improve this answer
























            up vote
            1
            down vote



            accepted







            up vote
            1
            down vote



            accepted







            1. So in what cases might we need only encryption but not decryption? It seems strange we would encrypt something that does not need decrypting at some point.



            For example, the CTR mode uses only Encryption, and CFB, OFB.




            1. It seems PRESENT can decrypt a ciphertext by running it in reverse. So why the need for some careful management for PRESENT to be used for both encryption and decryption?



            The correct sentence is




            In this way it can be used within challenge-response authentication protocols and, with some careful state management.




            All about the hardware implementation of PRESENT.



            This paragraph from the article;




            Encryption and decryption with present have roughly the same physical requirements. Opting to support both encryption and decryption will result in a lightweight block cipher implementation that is still smaller than an encryption-only AES. Opting to implement an encryption only present will give an ultra-lightweight solution. The encryption subkeys can be computed on-the-fly.




            So they compare their encryption and decryption supported hardware implementation to encryption-only AES claiming that PRESENT has smaller requirements.






            share|improve this answer















            1. So in what cases might we need only encryption but not decryption? It seems strange we would encrypt something that does not need decrypting at some point.



            For example, the CTR mode uses only Encryption, and CFB, OFB.




            1. It seems PRESENT can decrypt a ciphertext by running it in reverse. So why the need for some careful management for PRESENT to be used for both encryption and decryption?



            The correct sentence is




            In this way it can be used within challenge-response authentication protocols and, with some careful state management.




            All about the hardware implementation of PRESENT.



            This paragraph from the article;




            Encryption and decryption with present have roughly the same physical requirements. Opting to support both encryption and decryption will result in a lightweight block cipher implementation that is still smaller than an encryption-only AES. Opting to implement an encryption only present will give an ultra-lightweight solution. The encryption subkeys can be computed on-the-fly.




            So they compare their encryption and decryption supported hardware implementation to encryption-only AES claiming that PRESENT has smaller requirements.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 2 hours ago

























            answered 2 hours ago









            kelalaka

            1,704319




            1,704319




















                up vote
                1
                down vote













                Ciphers that are targeted for light-weight applications often have some common, but one-off, use cases. I have an IC with and ADC that is passively powered via RFID, and then sends encrypted data via SIMON. There's no commands required, so it is strictly one-way. I illuminate the IC electrically, and then it sends me a sample from the sensor. PRESENT is also used for applications like this, but I've never personally implemented it.






                share|improve this answer
























                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote













                  Ciphers that are targeted for light-weight applications often have some common, but one-off, use cases. I have an IC with and ADC that is passively powered via RFID, and then sends encrypted data via SIMON. There's no commands required, so it is strictly one-way. I illuminate the IC electrically, and then it sends me a sample from the sensor. PRESENT is also used for applications like this, but I've never personally implemented it.






                  share|improve this answer






















                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote









                    Ciphers that are targeted for light-weight applications often have some common, but one-off, use cases. I have an IC with and ADC that is passively powered via RFID, and then sends encrypted data via SIMON. There's no commands required, so it is strictly one-way. I illuminate the IC electrically, and then it sends me a sample from the sensor. PRESENT is also used for applications like this, but I've never personally implemented it.






                    share|improve this answer












                    Ciphers that are targeted for light-weight applications often have some common, but one-off, use cases. I have an IC with and ADC that is passively powered via RFID, and then sends encrypted data via SIMON. There's no commands required, so it is strictly one-way. I illuminate the IC electrically, and then it sends me a sample from the sensor. PRESENT is also used for applications like this, but I've never personally implemented it.







                    share|improve this answer












                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer










                    answered 1 hour ago









                    b degnan

                    1,2941521




                    1,2941521




















                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote













                        A bona fide use case for encryption only is inside a true random number generator (TRNG). If you have something small like:-



                        trng



                        it's common to whiten the raw entropy signal using a cryptographic primitive. PRESENT could be used in some form of CFB mode, although there are examples of vanilla ECB mode being used. The designers of these simple key type TRNGs often fail to appreciate the nuances of modes of operation and their consequences. So you'd effectively encrypt the output signal with no requirement to ever decrypt. The key would probably be fixed, rather than intermittently cycled around.



                        PRESENT has small resource requirements so would be a valid solution.




                        This image is only a representative example of the form factor.






                        share|improve this answer
























                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote













                          A bona fide use case for encryption only is inside a true random number generator (TRNG). If you have something small like:-



                          trng



                          it's common to whiten the raw entropy signal using a cryptographic primitive. PRESENT could be used in some form of CFB mode, although there are examples of vanilla ECB mode being used. The designers of these simple key type TRNGs often fail to appreciate the nuances of modes of operation and their consequences. So you'd effectively encrypt the output signal with no requirement to ever decrypt. The key would probably be fixed, rather than intermittently cycled around.



                          PRESENT has small resource requirements so would be a valid solution.




                          This image is only a representative example of the form factor.






                          share|improve this answer






















                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote










                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote









                            A bona fide use case for encryption only is inside a true random number generator (TRNG). If you have something small like:-



                            trng



                            it's common to whiten the raw entropy signal using a cryptographic primitive. PRESENT could be used in some form of CFB mode, although there are examples of vanilla ECB mode being used. The designers of these simple key type TRNGs often fail to appreciate the nuances of modes of operation and their consequences. So you'd effectively encrypt the output signal with no requirement to ever decrypt. The key would probably be fixed, rather than intermittently cycled around.



                            PRESENT has small resource requirements so would be a valid solution.




                            This image is only a representative example of the form factor.






                            share|improve this answer












                            A bona fide use case for encryption only is inside a true random number generator (TRNG). If you have something small like:-



                            trng



                            it's common to whiten the raw entropy signal using a cryptographic primitive. PRESENT could be used in some form of CFB mode, although there are examples of vanilla ECB mode being used. The designers of these simple key type TRNGs often fail to appreciate the nuances of modes of operation and their consequences. So you'd effectively encrypt the output signal with no requirement to ever decrypt. The key would probably be fixed, rather than intermittently cycled around.



                            PRESENT has small resource requirements so would be a valid solution.




                            This image is only a representative example of the form factor.







                            share|improve this answer












                            share|improve this answer



                            share|improve this answer










                            answered 46 mins ago









                            Paul Uszak

                            6,26811332




                            6,26811332



























                                 

                                draft saved


                                draft discarded















































                                 


                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function ()
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcrypto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f63409%2fin-what-cases-might-present-be-implemented-as-encryption-only%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                );

                                Post as a guest













































































                                Comments

                                Popular posts from this blog

                                List of Gilmore Girls characters

                                What does second last employer means? [closed]

                                One-line joke