Comparative analysis of the results of pseudorandom number generators for digital noise generation
Oleksandr Isakov, Stepan VoitusikThe paper presents the results of a study of the characteristics of five different pseudorandom number generators for use in digital noise generation problems used to mask signals in cybersecurity. The relevance of the study was conditioned by the growing need for high-quality masking methods that provide both effective performance and reliability of randomness, which is important for protecting confidential information in modern digital systems. The purpose of the study was to compare the PCG, Xoshiro128++, WELL512a, Mersenne Twister, and KISS algorithms in terms of their performance, statistical randomness, and ability to effectively mask a useful signal with noise. The performance of the algorithms was evaluated using BenchmarkDotNet. Standard NIST, Dieharder, and TestU01 tests were used to check the quality of sequence randomness. For the generated noise, a spectral analysis was performed using the power spectral density value. The masking efficiency was calculated by the signal-to-noise ratio, the results of the autocorrelation function, and the noise spectrogram. The results of the study showed that PCG and KISS are the most productive in terms of speed, which makes them attractive for applications where fast random sequence generation is important. WELL512a and PCG demonstrated the highest randomness quality, consistently passing all statistical tests. Analysis of the spectral noise distribution showed that all generators provide a uniform power distribution before filtering, and after filtering, the noise is successfully limited in the high-frequency range. The signal-to-noise ratio for all algorithms was about -13.6 dB, which indicates similar efficiency in noise masking. Autocorrelation analysis confirmed a low correlation for all generators outside of zero lag, which is important for maintaining the quality of randomness in long sequences. The practical value of the study lies in the selection of the optimal pseudorandom number generator for noise reduction problems in cybersecurity. The results obtained provide recommendations for choosing algorithms based on their speed and randomness, which will ensure a high level of information protection in digital systems
References
[1] Balalaieva, O., Marchenko, I., Korotenko, G., Beshta, D., & Pikuz, A. (2023). Performance research of C# programming language data serializers using the developed software product for testing. Reporter of the Priazovskyi State Technical University. Section: Technical Sciences, 47, 8-24. doi: 10.31498/2225-6733.47.2023.299923.
[2] Bassham, L.E. et al. (2010). A statistical test suite for random and pseudorandom number generators for cryptographic applications. Gaithersburg: National Institute of Standards and Technology. doi: 10.6028/nist.sp.800-22r1a.
[3] BenchmarkDotNet official documentation. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://surl.li/yobqul.
[4] Bhattacharjee, K., & Das, S. (2022). A search for good pseudo-random number generators: Survey and empirical studies. Computer Science Review, 45, article number 100471. doi: 10.1016/j.cosrev.2022.100471.
[5] Cook, J.D. (2017). Testing the PCG random number generator. Retrieved from https://surl.li/vjlfia.
[6] Deza, J.I., & Ihshaish, H. (2021). Qnoise: A generator of non-gaussian colored noise. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi: 10.2139/SSRN.3975571.
[7] Dieharder official documentation with test suit. (n.d.) Retrieved from https://surl.li/gruuvy.
[8] Feali, M.S. (2023). Realization of a pseudo-random number generator utilizing two coupled Izhikevich neurons on an FPGA platform. Analog Integrated Circuits and Signal Processing, 119(1), 57-68. doi: 10.1007/s10470-023-02223-2.
[9] Filho, N. (2024). Performance analysis in Csharp with BenchmarkDotNet: Report and evaluation. ZENODO, 1(12). doi: 10.5281/ZENODO.13826811.
[10] Hu, Z. (2020). High-speed and secure PRNG for cryptographic applications. International Journal of Computer Network and Information Security (IJCNIS), 12(3), 1-10. doi: 10.5815/ijcnis.2020.03.01.
[11] Isakov, O.V., & Voitusik, S.S. (2023). Comparative analysis of digital noise generated by additive Fibonacci generators. Ukrainian Journal of Information Technology, 5(1), 67-76. doi: 10.23939/ujit2023.01.067.
[12] Kajikawa, Y., Gan, W.-S., & Kuo, S.M. (2012). Recent advances on active noise control: Open issues and innovative applications. APSIPA Transactions on Signal and Information Processing, 1, article number e3. doi: 10.1017/ ATSIP.2012.4.
[13] Kuo, S.M., Kuo, K., & Gan, W.S. (2010). Active noise control: Open problems and challenges. In The 2010 International conference on green circuits and systems (pp. 164-169). Shanghai: IEEE. doi: 10.1109/icgcs.2010.5543076.
[14] L’Ecuyer, P. (2017). History of uniform random number generation. In 2017 Winter simulation conference (WSC) (pp. 202-230). Las Vegas: IEEE. doi: 10.1109/wsc.2017.8247790.
[15] Li, S., Lin, Z., Yang, Y., & Ning, R. (2024). A high-performance FPGA PRNG based on multiple deep-dynamic transformations. Entropy, 26(8), article number 671. doi: 10.3390/e26080671.
[16] Mandal, K. (2022). Cryptographic pseudorandom noise generators for lattice-based cryptography and differential privacy. In 2022 10th international workshop on signal design and its applications in communications (IWSDA) (pp. 1-4). Colchester: IEEE. doi: 10.1109/iwsda50346.2022.9870587.
[17] Panneton, F., L’Ecuyer, P., & Matsumoto, M. (2006). Improved long-period generators based on linear recurrences modulo 2. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 32(1), 1-16. doi: 10.1145/1132973.1132974.
[18] Raza S.F., & Satpute V.R. (2018). PRaCto: Pseudo random bit generator for cryptographic application. KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems, 12(12). doi: 10.3837/TIIS.2018.12.029.
[19] Saito, M., & Matsumoto, M. (2008). SIMD-oriented Fast Mersenne Twister: A 128-bit pseudorandom number generator. In A. Keller, S. Heinrich & H. Niederreiter (Eds.), Monte Carlo and Quasi-Monte Carlo methods 2006 (pp. 607-622). Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-74496-2_36.
[20] Sound data sets. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://commonvoice.mozilla.org/en/datasets.
[21] Syafalni, I., Jonatan, G., Sutisna, N., Mulyawan, R., & Adiono, T. (2022). Efficient homomorphic encryption accelerator with integrated PRNG using low-cost FPGA. IEEE Access, 10, 7753-7771. doi: 10.1109/access.2022.3143804.
[22] TestU01 official documentation. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://surl.li/nemayh.
[23] Vennos, A., George, K., & Michaels, A. (2021). Attacks and defenses for single-stage residue number system PRNGs. IoT, 2(3), 375-400. doi: 10.3390/iot2030020.
[24] Yu, F., Zhang, Z., Shen, H., Huang, Y., Cai, S., Jin, J., & Du, S. (2021). Design and FPGA implementation of a pseudorandom number generator based on a hopfield neural network under electromagnetic radiation. Frontiers in Physics, 9. doi: 10.3389/fphy.2021.690651.