**A PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF COMMONENCRYPTION TECHNIQUES WITH SECURE WATERMARK**

** SYSTEM (SWS)**

Ashraf Odeh1, Shadi R.Masadeh2, Ahmad Azzazi3

1Computer Information Systems Department, Isra University, Amman, Jordan

2Computer Networks Department, Isra University, Amman, Jordan

3Computer Information Systems Department, Applied Science University, Amman,

Jordan

**ABSTRACT**

Ciphering algorithms play a main role in information security systems. Therefore in this paper we areconsidering the important performance of these algorithms like CPU time consumption, memory usage andbattery usage. This research tries to demonstrate a fair comparison between the most common algorithmsand with a novel method called Secured Watermark System (SWS) in data encryption field according to CPU time, packet size and power consumption. It provides a comparison the most known algorithms used in encryption: AES (Rijndael), DES, Blowfish, and Secured Watermark System (SWS).For comparing these algorithms with each other variations of data block sizes, and a variation of encryption-decryption speeds where used in this research.In addition a comparison with different platforms such as Windows 8, Windows XP and Linux has been conducted. Finally the results of the experimentation demonstrate the performance and efficiency of the compared encryption algorithms with different parameters.

For comparing these algorithms with each other variations of data block sizes, and a variation of encryption-decryption speeds where used in this research.

In addition a comparison with different platforms such as Windows 8, Windows XP and Linux has been conducted. Finally the results of the experimentation demonstrate the performance and efficiency of the compared encryption algorithms with different parameters.

**KEYWORDS**

AES, DES, Blowfish, Secured Watermark System (SWS) and Computer Security.

**1.INTRODUCTION**

Security of information systems could be implemented with many widely known security algorithms, which can be adjusted with different settings for these algorithms [1],[2],[11],[12]. There are a lot of factors for security settings [3],[5] with main important factors like the type of cipher, which proves the security functionality, the processor time consumption, the size of

packets, the general power consumption, the data type used and the battery power consumption [6],[10],[13].

A brief description of the most common ciphering algorithms like AES, DES, Blowfish and 3DES are discussed below

**1- DES**: – The Data Encryption Standard is one of the most common used encryption mechanismintroduced in the year 1977.Using this algorithm data are encrypted using a 64 bit blocks with anencryption key of 56 bit length. The DES with 64 bit input as steps applied in series gives anoutput of 64 bits. The decryption of the cipher data is done with the reversed steps of the encryption mechanism with the same key. Using the same key for the encryption and for thedecryption mechanisms gives the attackers of the cipher data a big opportunity to attack theencryption system, which forms an important weakness of this algorithm [20],[19],[22].

**2- 3DES**: The 3DES encryption algorithm has the block of the size 64 bits. It uses an encryption key of 192 bits. This algorithm is similar to the original Data Encryption Standard, but with thedifference that the 3DES is to be applied 3 times. The repeated application of 3 times of the algorithm should give the encryption more complexity to increase security level of it and to increase the safe time when trying to decrypt it. The 3DES is therefore slower than the traditional block encryption algorithms [23],[24],[25].

**3- AES: **– Which stands for the Advanced Encryption Standard. This standard was introduced in the year 2001.The AES algorithm was developed to overcome the weaknesses of the Data Encryption Standard. It is a block cipher standard with a symmetric key solution. It provides anencryption method better than the 3DES one with improved security level and improved securityefficiency. A variation of the AES is called the “Rijindael” with a variable key length of 128 bits,192 bits or 256 bits, which is specified independent of the block length. The block length shouldbe limited in the standard to 128 bits [7]-[9],[11].

**4-Blowfish:** – This newly developed encryption mechanism is a symmetric block cipher standard.It should be fast for encrypting data with a 32 bit processor at the clock speed of 18 cycles per byte. It should use a compact memory size of 5K of less. This standard has a simple structure,which is easy to implement and use. Therefore the strength of the standard could be easily determined. The length of the key of the Blowfish standard is variable and can have the length of448 bits. This gives the user of this mechanism to get higher security, but the user should consider the speed issues when deploying higher values of the key length. The Block size of the Blowfishis usually 64 bits [5],[22].

In our Research, we developed a novel algorithm to provide data security which is called theWatermark System (SWS) algorithm. The newly developed algorithm SWS was tested throughthe evaluation of the four mentioned algorithms for encryption (i.e. AES, DES and Blowfish)compared with the developed (SWS) algorithm in term of time and power consumption. TheSWS adopts asymmetric encryption technique.

**2. RELATED WORKS**

There are many research studies related to the comparison of the commonly used security algorithms like DES,AES,3DES, Blowfish and others [15].Different studies implement these algorithms with different input files of different content and different sizes to compare theperformance of these algorithms with each other[15].

From pervious studies results show that the performance of Blowfish algorithm is the betteralgorithm compared with the other mentioned algorithms. It showed also that the AES Algorithmis efficient and faster than the other algorithms [16]. The transmission of data where consideredalso in the pervious studies, with the conclusion that the AES has the best performance among the compared encryption algorithms. It follows that; the DES encryption algorithm is faster 3 times

more than the 3DES algorithm for the same size of encrypted data.

In [14], the authors gave some assumptions about the most common security algorithms likeAES, XOR, and RC4. They compared the encryption algorithms by encrypting video streams inreal time and not text data only. They concluded; that the delay overhead of the AES encryptionInternational Journal of Network Security & Its Applications (IJNSA) Vol.7, No.3, May 2015 33algorithm is less than the overhead of the XOR algorithm and the RC4 algorithm when encrypting real time video stream data. Thus, the AES is a better solution when transmitting real time video data streams.

In [18] the authors made a performance study to get results about the usability of securityalgorithms within the scripting languages of web based programming languages. They analysedthe performance of the encryption algorithms when using web browser data.

Another study done in [17] has been done to compare the consumption of energy of the different available symmetric key encryption algorithms on handheld devices. It shows that only about45% of the battery power is remaining when encrypting a file of about 5MB using the 3DES,thatmeans, the no further encryption is [possible after that size of data because the battery died at all.

In the study [21], the authors used the free c++ encryption library (Cryto++ library).They havedone an evaluation of the most know encryption algorithms. They showed that the Blowfish andthe AES algorithms have the best security performance results. They showed also that both havebetter security level against attacks than the of DES and 3DES security algorithms.

In the study [21], the authors used the free c++ encryption library (Cryto++ library).They havedone an evaluation of the most know encryption algorithms. They showed that the Blowfish andthe AES algorithms have the best security performance results. They showed also that both have better security level against attacks than the of DES and 3DES security algorithms

Figure 1. Time consumption results of the comparison on OS Windows 8 for encryption of different sizes of data Packet.

Figure 2. Time consumption results of the comparison on OS Windows XP for encryption of different sizes of d ata Packet.

Figure3. Time consumption results of the comparison on OS Linux for encryption of different sizes of data Packet.

**4.2 The results of the power Consumption**

Figure 4, Figure 5 and Figure 6 show the power consumption of each encryption algorithms when varying the data size.

Figure 4. Power consumption for encrypt different data Packet size using windows XP

Figure 5. Power consumption for encrypt different data Packet size using windows 8

Figure 6. Power consumption for encrypt different data Packet size using Linux

**5. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK**

This paper presents a performance comparison of selected common encryption algorithms. The selected algorithms are AES, DES, Blowfish and Secure Watermark System (SWS).

Many conclusions can be done when analyzing the results of the experiments of this study. First;when varying the size of data packets, it can be shown that the SWS and the Blowfish algorithms have the best time consumption performance than the other compared algorithms.

Secondly; when varying the size of data, it can be shown that the DES algorithm have worst power consumption performance than the other compared algorithms.Also, we find that DES still has low performance compared to algorithms used.

Finally; when varying the type of operating system used, it shows that the SWS has better timeconsumption under the Windows XP operating system than the other compared operating systems.And we found (blowfish) result in time consumption in windows 8 is better than other operating system (Linux and Windows XP).And we found (AES) result in time consumption in LINUX is better than other operating system (Windows XP and Windows 8) and we conclude that the same result in the term of power consumption.

In our future work we will apply the same methodology on images and audio data, and we will work on a new methodology to make a reduction on the energy/power consumption of the security algorithms and to apply it on Wireless LANs to provide an energy efficient mechanism for the 802.11 WLAN protocol. We will try to replace all the primitives of the security algorithms with high energy consumptions with lower energy consumptions while keeping the security levelof each.

**REFERENCES**

[1] S. Masadeh W.Salameh(2007). “End to end keyless self-encrypting/decrypting streaming cipher”, Information Technology & National Security Conference 2007.

[2] A. Nadeem MYJ (2005).”A performance comparison of data encryption algorithms”, First International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies, pp 84- 89.

[3] Hardjono(2005),”Security in wireless lans and wans”, Artech House Publishers.

[4] N. Ruangch ,aijatupon and P. Krishnamurthy(2001),”Encryption and power consumption in wirelessLANs-N”,The Third IEEE Workshop on Wireless LANs, pp. 148-152.

[5] Schneier, Bruce (2012).”The Blowfish Encryption Algorithm”. Blowfish,<http://www.schneier.com/blowfish.html>.

[6] W. Stallings (2005),”Cryptography and Network Security”, 4th Ed, pp. 58-309, Prentice Hall.

[7] Penchalaiah, N. and Seshadri, R. ffective (2010),”Comparison and Evaluation of DES and Rijndael Algorithm (AES)”, International Journal of Computer Science and Engineering, Vol. 02, No.05.

[8] J. Daemen and V. Rijmen (2002),”The Design of Rijndael”, Springer-Verlag.

[9] N. Ferguson, J. Kelsey, S. Lucks, B. Schneier, M.Stay, D. Wagner, and D. Whiting(2000), Improved crypt-analysis of Rijndael,Seventh Fast Software Encryption Workshop, pp. 19, Springer-Verlag .

[10] K. Naik and D. S. L. Wei (2001),”Software implementation strategies for power-conscious systems,Mobile Networks and Applications”, vol. 6, pp. 291-305.

[11] Singhal, Nidhi and Raina, J P S (2011).”Comparative Analysis of AES and RC4 Algorithms for Better Utilization”, International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology, ISSN: 2231-280, July to Aug Issue 2011, pp. 177-181.

12] Singh, S Preet and Maini, Raman (2011).”Comparison of Data Encryption Algorithms”, International Journal of Computer Science and Communication, vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 125-127.

[13] N. Ferguson, D. Whiting, B. Schneier, J. Kelsey, S. Lucks, T .Kohno (2003).”Helix fast encryption and authentication in a single cryptographic primitive”, Fast Software Encryption, volume 2887 of LNCS. Springer-Verlag: 330-346.

[14] S. Hirani, Energy Consumption of Encryption Schemes in Wireless Devices Thesis(2008), University of Pittsburgh.

[15] A. Nadeem and M. Y. Javed,A performance comparison of data encryption algorithms(2005), Information and Communication Technologies, ICICT 2005, pp.84-89.

[16] Results of Comparing Tens of Encryption Algorithms Using Different Settings (2008), Crypto++ Benchmark. (http://www.eskimo.com/weidai/benchmarks.html)

[17] W.S.Elkilani, “H.m.Abdul-Kader (2009),”Performance of Encryption Techniques for Real Time Video Streaming”, IBIMA Conference, PP 1846-1850

[18] D. Salama, A. Elminaam and etal (2010),”Evaluating the Performance of Symmetric Encryption Algorithms”, International Journal of Network Security, Vol.10, No.3, PP.216–222.

[19] DES Overview, http://www.tropsoft.com/strongenc/des.htm [Explains how DES works in details, features and weaknesses].

[20] [Bruce1996] BRUCE SCHNEIER, Applied Cryptography, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1996.

[21] Crypto++ benchmark http://www.eskimo.com/~weidai/benchmarks.html.

[22] [Blowfish.NET] Coder’s Lagoon, http://www.hotpixel.net/software.html

[23] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_DES.

[24] http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/tip/Expertadvice-Encryption-101-Triple-DES-explained.

[25] Aamer Nadeem et al (2005),”A Performance Comparison of Data Encryption Algorithms”, IEEE.

**Authors**

Ashraf Odeh was born in 24th February 1974 in Amman –Jordan he received a BSc degreein ComputerScience in 1995 atPrincess Summay University in Amman-Jordan and MSc degree in InformationTechnology in 2003 at Al-Nileen University in Sudan with a Thesis titled ” Visual Database administrator Techniques ” After that, he received PhD from department of Computer Information System in 2009 at Arab Academy in Amman-Jordan with a Thesis titled ” Robust Watermarking of Relational Database Systems “.He interested in image processing, Watermarking, Relational Database, E-copyright protection, E-learning and Security Issues,Encryption and Decryption Systems. Dr. Odeh Currently, working at Al-ISRA University in ComputerInformation System Department as assistant Prof. and submitted a number of conference papers and journals.

Shadi R. Masadeh was born in 21th March 1977 in Amman –Jordan he received a BScdegree inComputer Science and Computer Information System in 2000 at PhiladelphiaUniversity in Amman-Jordan and MSc degree in Information Technology in 2003 After that,he received PhD from department of Computer Information System in 2009 at Arab Academyin Amman-Jordan .He interests in many areas of research such as E-learning Management and SecurityIssues, Encryption and Decryption Systems, Networking and Wireless security. Dr. Masadeh Currently,working at Al-ISRA University in Computer Networks Department as assistant Prof. and submitted anumber of conference papers and journals.

Ahmad Azzazi is an assistant professor in the Faculty of Information Technology at the Applied Science University. Dr. Azzazi’s research interests include Software securityengineering, software engineering frameworks, natural language processing, security expertsystems

%d bloggers like this: