Speeding Up the Quantum Future: Optimizing Code-Based Cryptography

by

Author: Denis Avetisyan

Researchers have achieved significant performance gains in the HQC post-quantum key encapsulation mechanism, bringing practical quantum-resistant security closer to reality.

OptHQC demonstrably reduces the runtime of the HQC component, achieving an overall performance improvement when incorporating multiple optimization methods-a reduction visualized by a lower curve indicating enhanced efficiency.
OptHQC demonstrably reduces the runtime of the HQC component, achieving an overall performance improvement when incorporating multiple optimization methods-a reduction visualized by a lower curve indicating enhanced efficiency.

This work details optimizations for HQC using AVX vectorization, Reed-Solomon codes, and table-driven decoding to enhance speed and side-channel resistance.

While the transition to post-quantum cryptography is critical for future-proofed security, implementing quantum-resistant algorithms introduces significant performance overhead. This paper introduces OptHQC: Optimize HQC for High-Performance Post-Quantum Cryptography, presenting a comprehensively optimized implementation of the HQC code-based key encapsulation mechanism. Through techniques including AVX-based vectorization and table-driven decoding, OptHQC achieves an average 55% speedup over existing implementations, while also enhancing side-channel resistance. Will these optimizations prove sufficient to facilitate widespread adoption of code-based cryptography in resource-constrained environments?

The Looming Quantum Threat and the Promise of HQC

The bedrock of modern digital security, public-key cryptography – including widely used algorithms like RSA and ECC – faces an existential threat from the rapid advancement of quantum computing. These algorithms rely on the computational difficulty of certain mathematical problems, such as factoring large numbers or computing discrete logarithms. However, Shor’s algorithm, a quantum algorithm developed in 1994, can efficiently solve these problems, rendering current public-key systems vulnerable. This looming crisis necessitates a proactive shift towards post-quantum cryptography – the development and implementation of cryptographic systems that are resistant to attacks from both classical and quantum computers. The urgency stems from the potential for “store now, decrypt later” attacks, where malicious actors could intercept encrypted data today and decrypt it once sufficiently powerful quantum computers become available. Consequently, research and standardization efforts are heavily focused on identifying and deploying resilient alternatives, ensuring the continued confidentiality and integrity of digital communications and data in the quantum era.

HQC operates as a key encapsulation mechanism (KEM), a cryptographic system designed to securely exchange keys for subsequent encryption. Unlike many current public-key schemes vulnerable to quantum attacks, HQC’s security rests on the hardness of problems related to structured codes – specifically, decoding generic linear codes. These codes, mathematical objects defining error-correcting properties, provide a robust foundation because finding solutions to the decoding problem becomes computationally intractable even with the power of a quantum computer. The KEM process involves encapsulating a secret key within a publicly available message, allowing secure transmission and subsequent decryption. This approach, leveraging the well-studied properties of structured codes, positions HQC as a leading candidate in the ongoing effort to develop post-quantum cryptographic standards, offering a potential solution to maintain secure communications in a future dominated by quantum computing.

The resilience of the HQC key encapsulation mechanism stems from its grounding in the established field of algebraic coding theory. Specifically, HQC leverages the hardness of problems related to decoding general linear codes – a well-studied area of mathematics for decades. Unlike many contemporary post-quantum cryptography proposals relying on less-understood problems, HQC benefits from a robust theoretical foundation and extensive analysis. This isn’t to say the problem is easy – finding the closest codeword remains an $NP$-hard challenge – but its deep connection to known mathematical structures allows cryptographers to rigorously assess its security. The reliance on these well-understood problems allows for stronger guarantees of resistance against attacks, including those potentially enabled by quantum computers, offering a significant advantage in the evolving landscape of cryptographic security.

Computational cost analysis of HQC-128 reveals that polynomial multiplication and code encoding/decoding are the dominant operations, with other steps like hashing, vector generation, resizing, and addition contributing minimal overhead.
Computational cost analysis of HQC-128 reveals that polynomial multiplication and code encoding/decoding are the dominant operations, with other steps like hashing, vector generation, resizing, and addition contributing minimal overhead.

Constructing Security: The Foundation of HQC’s Code-Based Approach

The security of the HQC cryptosystem is predicated on the computational hardness of decoding problems involving general structured codes. Specifically, HQC utilizes a concatenated code construction, where one code is used within another to enhance error correction capabilities and increase the overall decoding complexity. This approach transforms the original decoding problem into a series of simpler, yet still challenging, decoding instances. The difficulty arises because decoding concatenated codes requires solving these nested decoding problems sequentially; an attacker must first decode the inner code and then the outer code, and failure at either stage prevents successful decryption. This layered structure significantly increases the computational resources needed for a successful attack, providing a robust security margin against known decoding algorithms.

The error correction in HQC is achieved through a concatenated code structure, utilizing a Reed-Muller (RM) code as the inner code and a Reed-Solomon (RS) code as the outer code. The RM code, a non-binary code, provides initial error correction capabilities against errors occurring during transmission. This is then augmented by the RS code, a maximum distance separable (MDS) code, which provides further error correction and ensures a defined minimum Hamming distance between codewords. This concatenation effectively increases the overall error-correcting capability of the system, allowing for the recovery of data even in the presence of significant noise or interference. The parameters of both the RM and RS codes – specifically, their code lengths and minimum distances – are chosen to meet the security requirements and error tolerance needs of the HQC scheme.

HQC key generation relies on a process of careful sampling to create the initial secret key, followed by the application of cryptographic hash functions. Specifically, the SHAKE algorithm is employed due to its performance characteristics; optimizations implemented within HQC’s construction have achieved a 2x reduction in seed expansion time compared to standard SHAKE implementations. This optimization is critical for efficient key generation, particularly in resource-constrained environments, and ensures a faster throughput of secret key creation without compromising security. The resulting hash serves as the foundation for subsequent operations within the HQC cryptosystem, ensuring the confidentiality and integrity of communications.

Lookup table optimization precomputes and stores values of gj⋅x over GF(2⁸) to replace runtime multiplications with constant-time table lookups for Reed-Solomon codes.
Lookup table optimization precomputes and stores values of gj⋅x over GF(2⁸) to replace runtime multiplications with constant-time table lookups for Reed-Solomon codes.

Encoding, Encryption, and Decryption: Transforming Data with Rigorous Mathematical Precision

Within the HQC (Hardened Quasi-Cyclic) cryptosystem, encoding is the initial step in securing a plaintext message. This process transforms the message, represented as a sequence of bits, into a codeword. The encoding utilizes specific error-correcting codes, such as Goppa codes, to introduce redundancy. This redundancy allows the receiver to detect and correct errors that may occur during transmission. The resulting codeword, a higher-dimensional vector, is then prepared for the subsequent encryption stage, providing a structured input for the cryptographic operations and enabling the system’s resilience against noise and attacks.

The encryption stage within the HQC system applies mathematical transformations to the encoded codeword using keys derived during key generation to produce ciphertext. This process fundamentally relies on polynomial multiplication, and optimizations to this calculation significantly impact performance. Specifically, the implementation of Sparse × Dense Polynomial Multiplication within HQC has demonstrated speed improvements of up to 40% compared to standard methods. This optimization involves efficiently multiplying a sparse polynomial – a polynomial with mostly zero coefficients – with a dense polynomial, reducing the number of required computations and thereby accelerating the encryption process. The resulting ciphertext contains no readily discernible information about the original message without the corresponding secret key.

Decryption in HQC relies on the application of the secret key and subsequent syndrome computation to recover the original plaintext message from the received ciphertext. Specifically, the ciphertext undergoes a process where the secret key is used to compute error values, and these values are then used in syndrome computation. This syndrome is then used to correct the errors introduced during encoding and encryption, effectively reversing the transformations and yielding the original message. The accuracy of this recovery is dependent on the confidentiality of the secret key and the correct implementation of the syndrome decoding algorithm.

Optimizing for Performance: The Pursuit of Computational Efficiency in HQC

The efficiency of the HQC post-quantum key encapsulation mechanism is fundamentally tied to the speed of polynomial multiplication, and modern implementations heavily rely on Sparse-Dense Multiplication techniques to achieve optimal performance. Traditional polynomial multiplication methods become computationally expensive as the size of the polynomials increases; however, Sparse-Dense Multiplication strategically exploits the fact that one polynomial is typically sparse – containing mostly zero coefficients – while the other is dense. By focusing computations only on the non-zero coefficients of the sparse polynomial and their corresponding terms in the dense polynomial, this approach dramatically reduces the number of required multiplications and additions. This optimization is particularly impactful in HQC, where polynomial multiplication forms the core of both key generation and encryption/decryption processes, resulting in substantial speed improvements over naive implementations and enabling practical application of the scheme.

The implementation of Advanced Vector Extensions 2 (AVX2) instructions represents a crucial acceleration technique within High-Quality Cryptography (HQC). These instructions facilitate Single Instruction, Multiple Data (SIMD) operations, allowing the processor to perform the same operation on multiple data points simultaneously. This is particularly beneficial in cryptographic algorithms like HQC, which involve extensive vector and matrix operations. By harnessing AVX2, computations that previously required multiple clock cycles can be completed in fewer, dramatically increasing throughput. Specifically, the parallel processing capabilities of AVX2 expedite calculations related to polynomial multiplication and other core HQC processes, leading to substantial performance gains and enabling faster key generation and encapsulation procedures. This vectorized approach efficiently utilizes modern processor architecture, maximizing computational power and reducing overall runtime.

To accelerate computations within the HQC system, a sophisticated lookup table optimization strategy is employed, specifically targeting operations in the Galois Field $GF(2^8)$. This technique precomputes and stores frequently used values, dramatically reducing the number of runtime calculations. Crucially, this optimization is paired with constant-time execution safeguards, a vital security measure designed to prevent side-channel attacks that exploit timing variations to reveal sensitive information. The resulting implementation achieves a significant performance boost – a 20-25% reduction in the number of $GF(2^8)$ multiplications required by the table-driven Reed-Solomon decoder – without compromising the security of the cryptographic process.

Significant performance gains are realized through a confluence of optimization strategies applied to the HQC post-quantum key encapsulation mechanism. Across all tested parameter sets, implementation of sparse-dense polynomial multiplication, coupled with AVX2 instruction leveraging and lookup table optimization, collectively delivers a substantial reduction in runtime – achieving a 50 to 60% speedup. This improvement is critical for practical deployment, addressing a key barrier to wider adoption of HQC in security-sensitive applications where computational efficiency is paramount. The observed acceleration allows for faster key generation, encapsulation, and decapsulation processes, making HQC a more viable alternative to classical cryptographic schemes.

The pursuit of efficiency in cryptographic implementations, as demonstrated by the optimizations to HQC, echoes a fundamental principle of mathematical elegance. This work meticulously refines polynomial multiplication and decoding processes, prioritizing provable correctness over mere empirical functionality. It is not simply about achieving faster execution; it’s about structuring the algorithm with inherent consistency. As John McCarthy aptly stated, “It is better to be precise in one’s questions than to be right in one’s answers.” The precision with which the researchers approached the implementation of Reed-Solomon codes and AVX vectorization, striving for optimal performance and side-channel resistance, exemplifies this commitment to foundational correctness. The resulting speedups are a natural consequence of a logically sound and well-defined system.

The Road Ahead

The presented optimizations for HQC, while demonstrably effective, merely address the superficial inefficiencies inherent in translating abstract algebra into silicon execution. The true challenge remains not speed, but scalability. A constant-factor improvement achieved through vectorization is ultimately transient; asymptotic behavior dictates the longevity of any cryptographic proposal. Future work must rigorously examine the limitations imposed by the underlying Reed-Solomon codes – specifically, whether increased code rates, while enhancing security, introduce unacceptable computational burdens. The current emphasis on side-channel resistance, laudable as it is, should not eclipse the fundamental question of mathematical intractability.

Furthermore, the reliance on table-driven decoding, while pragmatic, hints at a lack of deeper algorithmic insight. A truly elegant solution would eschew precomputation in favor of a provably efficient decoding algorithm, ideally one that leverages the inherent structure of the error-correcting codes. The pursuit of such a solution may necessitate a departure from traditional Reed-Solomon constructions, exploring alternative code families with more amenable properties.

Ultimately, the field of post-quantum cryptography requires a shift in perspective. It is not enough to simply ‘patch’ existing algorithms to withstand quantum attacks. A genuine breakthrough demands a rediscovery of foundational principles – a relentless pursuit of mathematical purity and a willingness to abandon solutions that are merely ‘good enough’.

Original article: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2512.12904.pdf

Contact the author: https://www.linkedin.com/in/avetisyan/

See also:

2025-12-16 10:51