NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact Study

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Introduction

Introduction
OMB Control No. 0693-0033
Expiration Date: 06/30/2019
RM Advisory Services LLC, a CPA firm based in Alexandria, VA is conducting this survey on behalf of the Technology
Partnership Office (TPO) of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Your survey responses will form the
basis of a retrospective economic impact assessment of NIST’s Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) program (19962016).
NIST regards these studies as important because they demonstrate the effectiveness of its programs in terms that budgetconscious stakeholders understand (return-on-investment) and because they are a source of program management
“lessons-learned.”
Neither NIST nor any government agency will receive the raw survey data. All survey data will be interpreted and
reported ONLY in aggregated form, as averages and ranges. No individual person, individual agency or company,
or a unit thereof will be discernable.
We DO NOT expect your estimates to be based on accounting quality data. We need you to provide your best
estimates to all questions based on your experienced judgment. If point estimates make you uncomfortable, please
provide a range in which you believe the estimate falls.
Issues concerning specific survey questions should be directed to Ms. Stacey Ferris and
Mr. David Leech .
_____________

Note: This collection of information contains Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) requirements approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Notwithstanding any other provisions of the law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a
collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number. Public
reporting burden for this collection is estimated to be thirty-five (35) minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing
data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden
estimate or any aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the National Institute of Standards and Technology,
Attn: Kathleen McTigue; Phone: (301) 975-8530.

1

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Economic
Sector

Your answer to this question will direct you to the correct set of survey questions.
* 1. Please select the type of entity you were employed by in 2017.
Federal government agency (civilian & military)
consumer of cryptographic hardware, software, and
services

Private sector cryptographic module/system integrator
(uses externally produced cryptographic hardware or
software in products)

State/Local/Tribal government agency consumer of
cryptographic hardware, software, and services

Academic or independent cryptographer
Cryptographic validation testing consultant

Private sector consumer of cryptographic hardware,
software, and services
Private sector producer/developer of cryptographic
hardware or software modules or systems

2

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Public Sector
Consumer Identification

Welcome to the Public Sector Consumer portion of the survey
11 Questions
Neither NIST nor any government agency will receive the raw survey data. All survey data will be interpreted and reported
ONLY in aggregated form, as averages and ranges. No individual person, individual agency or company, or a unit thereof
will be discernable.
We DO NOT expect your estimates to be based on accounting quality data. We need you to provide your best estimates to
all questions based on your experienced judgment. If point estimates make you uncomfortable, please provide a range in
which you believe the estimate falls.
Questions with an * next to them are linked to later questions or survey logic and enable the pre-population of some
succeeding questions.

2. Please select from the appropriate dropdown box:
Federal employees please select the agency you were with in 2017.
State/Local/Tribal please select the state you were employed by in 2017.
Federal employee

State/Local/Tribal employee

Please
select:
Additional information:

3

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Public Sector Consumer Part 1 of 4 - AES
Adoption

Questions with an * next to them are linked to later questions or survey logic and enable the pre-population
of some succeeding questions.
For the questions below the following historical information may be useful.
The Advanced Encryption Standard (AES), Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS)-197, was
issued in December 2001.
FIPS-46/46-1/46-2 (Data Encryption Standard) was last reaffirmed in 1993 and retired from use by
Federal agencies in 2005.
FIPS-46-3 (Triple-DES, TDES, or 3DES) remains in effect for the encryption of unclassified
confidential information through 2030.
Symmetric block algorithms are assigned “security strength” according to key size measured in bits.
DES has 56-bit key size. TDES has two key strengths: 2-key (80 bits), and 3-key (112 bits).
As of January 1, 2011, only 3-key TDES is acceptable for the Federal government.
AES has three key strengths: 128 bits, 192 bits, and 256 bits. AES-128 can be used to encrypt
information classified through the SECRET level. AES-192 and AES-256 can be used to encrypt
information classified through the TOP SECRET level.

* 3. Approximately how many data centers, IT hosting service providers, and cloud service
providers supported your organization in calendar year 2017 (Jan - Dec)?

Explanation (if needed)

4

4. If you are responsible for more than one data center, IT hosting service providers, and IT
cloud service providers as enumerated in the preceding question, and AES was adopted by
them in different years, please approximate the first year that a center/provider adopted AES,
and the last year that a center/provider adopted AES?
Year

First center adopted
in:
Last center adopted
in:
Explanation (if needed)

5. What symmetric block encryption algorithm did the first and last AES adopters (data center,
hosting service, cloud service) use immediately prior to AES adoption?
Algorithm Used Pre-AES

First adopter
Last adopter
Explanation (if needed)

5

6. Please help us characterize what the shift from DES/TDES to AES meant in operational
terms.
Yes

No

Were there significant
switching costs?
Did the shift to AES
require significant
upgrading of
equipment and
software?
Were the relevant
upgrades scheduled?
Were equipment
suppliers respondent?
Did the shift to AES
require a significant
increase in training?
Was there internal or
external “push-back”
over the shift from
DES/TDES to AES?
Additional information:

6

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Public Sector Consumer Part 2 - Current
Operations

The next three questions are about the 2017 costs of operations that use AES. They will help us make
estimates of the economic value of AES.
If you do not know or are uncomfortable providing a number, please consider providing a range in which
the answer lies.

* 7. Across all your organization's data centers, IT hosting services, and IT cloud service
providers, please estimate the average annual encryption system processing hours
devoted to core encryption processing, key generation, key management, and any other secure
data storage and transmission in 2017. (There are 8760 hours in a year.)
Average annual hours per year

8. Across all your organization's data centers, IT hosting services, and IT cloud service
providers, please estimate the average annual multiple of encryption system processing
hours devoted to core encryption processing, key generation, key management, and any other
secure data storage and transmission from initial adoption of AES through 2017.
(We are cognizant that the effect of Moore’s Law could result in negative rates. For example, an
estimate of -1.5X/year represents newer hardware and possibly no change in workload; -3X
says there is less work going on; and 2X says there more data is being encrypted.)

Explanation (if needed)

7

* 9. For 2017, across all your organization's data centers, IT hosting services, and IT cloud
service providers, please estimate your average encryption system budget ($) devoted to
core encryption processing, key generation, key management, and any other secure data
storage and transmission.
Average encryption system budget (US$)

10. Approximately what percent of your “average annual encryption system budget” is dedicated
to i.) "facilities and equipment” and ii.) “personnel” (government employees and in-house
contractors)?
% of budget dedicated

Facilities & Equipment
Personnel
Explanation (if needed)

11. What is the approximate number of full-time personnel (Federal or State employees and inhouse contractors) directly employed by your organization on account of your encryption system
budget?
Number of full-time
personnel

8

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Public Sector Consumer Part 3 - Counterfactual
Questions

For the following question, it may be helpful to know that AES processes data approximately 3-4 times faster than TDES,
and is an even larger multiple faster than DES.

12. On average, across all data centers, IT hosting services, and IT cloud service providers
enumerated in Q1, what multiple of resources (i.e. the multiple of budget dollars for: additional
computer processing hours; extra equipment or facilities; additional budget for added personnel
including both direct Government and in-house contractor employees) would be required in
2017 if AES was unavailable, and if only DES/TDES was available for processing confidential
information?

9

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Public Sector Consumer Part 4 - Standards
Development

The following questions refer to the diffusion of strong encryption technology as represented in the
proliferation of international standards for which AES is regarded as “indispensible” (i.e., included as a
normative reference).

13. Select all of the following consensus standards development efforts (and/or their U.S.
counterparts) in which members of your organization participated.
This list includes standards from ISO, IEEE, IETF, and CCSDS.
ISO/IEC 9564:2014 - Financial services — Personal
Identification Number (PIN) management and security

ISO/IEC 19772:2009 - Information technology -- Security
techniques -- Authenticated encryption

ISO/IEC 9797:2011 - Information technology -- Security

ISO/IEC 23001:2015 - Information technology -- MPEG

techniques -- Message Authentication Codes (MACs)

systems technologies

ISO/IEC 10116:2017 - Information technology -- Security

ISO/IEC DIS 23009:2013 - Information technology --

techniques -- Modes of operation for an n-bit block cipher

Dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP (DASH)

ISO/IEC 11568:2012 - Financial services -- Key

ISO/TS 24534:2011 - Road transport and Traffic

management (retail)

Telematics - Automatic Vehicle and Equipment

ISO/IEC 11889:2015 - Information technology -- Trusted
Platform Module
ISO/IEC 13141:2015 - Electronic fee collection -Localisation augmentation communication for
autonomous systems
ISO/IEC 13157-2:2016 - Information technology -Telecommunications and information exchange between
systems -- NFC Security
ISO/TR 13569:2005 - Financial services -- Information
security guidelines
ISO/IEC 14543:2010 - Information technology -- Home
electronic system (HES) architecture
ISO/IEC 15764:2004 - Road vehicles -- Extended data
link security
ISO/IEC 16504:2011 - Information technology -Telecommunications and information exchange between
systems -- MAC and PHY for operation in TV white
space

Identification - Electronic Registration Identification (ERI)
for Vehicles
ISO/IEC 24767:2009 - Information technology -- Home
network security
ISO/IEC 24771:2014 - Information technology -Telecommunications and information exchange between
systems -- MAC/PHY standard for ad hoc wireless
network to support QoS in an industrial work
environment
ISO/IEC 25185:2016 - Identification cards -- Integrated
circuit card authentication protocols
ISO/IEC 26430:2008 - Digital cinema (D-cinema)
operations
IEEE 802.1 AE: 2006 - IEEE Standard for Local and
Metropolitan Area Networks: Media Access Control
(MAC) Security
IEEE 1609.2-2016 - IEEE Standard for Wireless Access
in Vehicular Environments--Security Services for
Applications and Management Messages

10

ISO/IEC 18013-3:2017 - Information technology -Personal identification -- ISO-compliant driving license

IEEE 1619-2007 - IEEE Standard for Cryptographic
Protection of Data on Block-Oriented Storage Devices

ISO/IEC 18031:2011 - Information technology -- Security
techniques -- Random bit generation

IETF RFC 6188, 2011 - The Use of AES-192 and AES256 in Secure RTP

ISO/IEC 18033-4:2011 - Information technology --

IETF RFC 3602, 2003 - The AES-CBC Cipher Algorithm

Security techniques -- Encryption algorithms

and Its Use with IPSEC

ISO/IEC 19038:2005 - Banking and related financial

ETSI TS 102825, 2011 - Digital Video Broadcasting

services -- Triple DEA -- Modes of operation --

(DVB) - Content Protection and Copy Management

Implementation guidelines

(DVB-CPCM)
CCSDS 352.0-B-1, 2012 - Consultative Committee for
Space Data Systems (CCSDS) CRYPTOGRAPHIC
ALGORITHM

14. If AES was not available, what would be the average additional number of hours per
standard that your organization’s personnel would have committed to all the standards
development efforts in which they participated?
Average Additional Number of Hours

15. If you believe the standards development efforts in which your organization’s personnel
participated would have been delayed in the absence of AES, estimate the average number of
months across the standards that publication would have been delayed.
Average Number of Months

11

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Private Sector Consumer Part 1 of 5 - AES
adoption

Welcome to the Private Sector Consumer portion of the survey
26 questions total
Please note that neither NIST nor any government agency will receive the raw survey data. All survey data
will be interpreted and reported ONLY in aggregated form, as averages and ranges. No individual person,
individual agency or company, or a unit thereof will be discernable.
We DO NOT expect your estimates to be based on accounting quality data. We need you to provide your best estimates to
all questions based on your experienced judgment. If point estimates make you uncomfortable, please provide a range in
which you believe the estimate falls.
Questions with an * next to them are linked to later questions or survey logic and enable the prepopulation of some
succeeding questions.

16. Please select the industry sector where you worked for the majority of 2016.
If your company spans multiple industry sectors, please select its primary area(s) of operation.
11 - Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting

53 - Real Estate Rental and Leasing

21 - Mining

54 - Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

22 - Utilities

55 - Management of Companies and Enterprises

23 - Construction

56 - Administrative and Support and Waste Management

31-33 - Manufacturing
42 - Wholesale Trade
44-45 - Retail Trade
48-49 - Transportation and Warehousing
51 - Information
52 - Finance and Insurance

and Remediation Services
61 - Educational Services
62 - Health Care and Social Assistance
71 - Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
72 - Accommodation and Food Services
81 - Other Services (except Public Administration)
92 - Public Administration

12

* 17. Approximately how many data centers, IT hosting service providers, and cloud service
providers supported your organization in calendar year 2017?

Explanation (if needed)

18. If you are responsible for more than one data center, IT hosting service providers, and IT
cloud service providers as enumerated in the preceding question, and AES was adopted by
them in different years, please approximate what was the first year that a center/provider
adopted AES, and the last year that a center/provider adopted AES?
Year

First center/
provider adopted
AES in:
Last center/
provider adopted AES
in:
Explanation (if needed)

19. What symmetric block encryption algorithm did the first and last AES adopters (data center,
hosting service, cloud service) use immediately prior to AES adoption?
Algorithm Used Pre-AES

First adopter
Last adopter
Explanation (if needed)

13

20. Please help us characterize what the shift from your prior algorithm(s) to AES meant in
operational terms.
Yes

No

Were there significant
switching costs?
Did the shift to AES
require significant
upgrading of
equipment and
software?
Were the relevant
upgrades scheduled?
Were equipment
suppliers respondent?
Did the shift to AES
require a significant
increase in training?
Was there internal or
external “push-back”
over the shift to AES?
Additional information:

14

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Private Sector Consumer Part 2 of 5 - Current System
Operations

The next 3 questions ask for estimates on the 2017 operational costs around the use of AES. These questions will help us
make calculations of the value of AES to industry.
Questions with an * next to them are linked to later questions or survey logic and enable the pre-population of some
succeeding questions.

* 21. Across all {{ Q17 }} data centers, IT hosting services, and IT cloud service providers
enumerated in the first section, please estimate the average annual encryption system
processing hours devoted to core encryption processing, key generation, key management,
and any other secure data storage and transmission in 2017. (There are 8760 hours in a year.)
Average annual hours per year

22. Across all {{ Q17 }} data centers, IT hosting services, and IT cloud service providers, please
estimate the average annual growth rate in encryption system processing hours devoted
to core encryption processing, key generation, key management, and any other secure data
storage and transmission from initial adoption of AES through 2017.
(We are cognizant that the effect of Moore’s Law could result in negative rates. For example, an
estimate of -1.5X/year represents newer hardware and possibly no change in workload; -3X
says there is less work going on; and 2X says there more data is being encrypted.)

Explanation (if needed)

15

* 23. For 2017, across all {{ Q17 }} data centers, IT hosting services, and IT cloud service
providers, please estimate your average encryption system budget (US$) devoted to core
encryption processing, key generation, key management, and any other secure data storage
and transmission.
Average Encryption System Budget (US$)

16

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Private Sector Consumer Part 3-1
Counterfactual

These two questions will help us build the most likely scenario of what would have happened if AES did not exist. Questions
with an * next to them are linked to later questions or survey logic.

* 24. If the choice of AES had not been available to your organization’s data centers, hosting
services, or cloud services, please select the likely alternative strong symmetric block
cipher (key size greater than 112, i.e. stronger than TDES) that your organization would have
used.

* 25. In the absence of NIST's AES competition (1997 -2001), what scenario would most likely
have happened in your industry?
A - Coalesced inter-industry-wide around an alternative
strong encryption algorithm

D - Fragmented along other lines
E - None of the above. Please explain.

B - Coalesced around industry specific applications
C - Fragmented among industry subgroups (with different
groups preferring different encryption algorithms)
Additional comments (if needed)

17

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Private Sector Consumer Part 3-2 - Counterfactual
Questions

This section contains 5 counterfactual questions based on your selections on the previous page. Your answers will help us
build a scenario of what would have happened if AES was not available.

26. Do you believe that in the absence of NIST's AES competition (1997 - 2001) that {{ Q22 }}
would have emerged as the accepted standard across most industries?
Yes, this algorithm is the most probable AES alternative for most industries.
No, this algorithm is not the most probable AES alternative for most industries.
Additional comments (if needed)

18

27. If you selected no, please provide the industries and the alternative algorithms you believe
they would have coalesced around in the comments box below the table. Please use the 2digit industry codes and algorithms in the table below to enter your answer as "industry code,
algorithm".
Industry
11 - Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting
21 - Mining
22 - Utilities
23 - Construction
31-33 - Manufacturing
42 - Wholesale Trade
44-45 - Retail Trade
48-49 - Transportation and Warehousing
51 - Information
52 - Finance and Insurance
53 - Real Estate Rental and Leasing
54 - Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
55 - Management of Companies and Enterprises
56 - Administrative and Support and Waste Management
and Remediation Services
61 - Educational Services
62 - Health Care and Social Assistance
71 - Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
72 - Accommodation and Food Services
81 - Other Services (except Public Administration)
92 - Public Administration

Algorithms
Blowfish
Camellia
CAST-256
CRYPTON
DEAL
DFC
E2
FROG
HPC
IDEA
LOKI97
MAGENTA
MARS
Proprietary
algorithms
RC5
RC6
SAFER+
SAFER K-128
Serpent
SQUARE
Twofish

19

28. On average, across all {{ Q17 }} data centers/IT hosting services, and IT cloud service
providers, what multiple of resources (the multiple of budget dollars for all aspects of the
encryption system: core encryption processing, key generation, key management, and any other
secure data storage and transmission) would be required in 2017 if AES was unavailable, that
is, if only {{ Q24 }} was available for processing confidential information?
(Note: AES processes data approximately 3-4 times faster than TDES, and is generally faster
than most other symmetric block algorithms.)

29. Across all your organization's data centers, IT hosting services, and IT cloud service
providers for which AES was the actual algorithm of choice, please estimate the average
annual budget dollars in 2017 for computer facilities and equipment, average number of fulltime personnel, and the average annual compensation (salary + benefits) of qualified personnel.
Budget for Computer
Facilities & Equipment
(US$)
FT personnel
Compensation (US$)

20

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Private Sector Consumer Part 4 of 5 Interoperability

These 9 questions will help us make estimates of the economic value of interoperability between systems.
Questions with an * next to them are linked to later questions or survey logic and enable the pre-population
of some succeeding questions.
These questions refer to an encryption network. An encryption network is a network of nodes that
communicate with each other using the same encryption standard. For example, instead of almost all
networks using AES as the data in transit and data at rest standard, imagine a world where the U.S.
government chose encryption algorithm W, the finance industry chose encryption algorithm X, the
aerospace industry chose encryption algorithm Y, the automotive industry chose encryption algorithm Z,
etc.

30. Regardless of the specific “absent AES” scenario selected in your previous responses, some
market fragmentation in the demand for strong, efficient symmetric block ciphers would likely
have occurred. As fragmentation increases, interoperability decreases, where interoperability is
defined as the ability of encryption network nodes to communicate with each other.
If “n” is the number of different encryption networks with which an organization's
data centers/providers interoperate (n=1 if all organizations in all networks employ the same
algorithm), in your experience what is the functional relationship of “n” to the costs of
maintaining interoperability?

Costs to maintain interoperability rise linearly as a

Costs to maintain interoperability decline linearly as a

function of n

function of n

Costs to maintain interoperability rise exponentially as a

Costs to maintain interoperability decline exponentially

function of n (please provide the probable exponential

as a function of n (please provide the probable

power in the comment box below)

exponential power in the comment box below)

Costs to maintain interoperability remain unchanged as
a function of n
Explanation (if needed)

21

31. What typical experiences lead you to your choice in the last question?

32. Across all {{ Q17 }} data centers, IT hosting services, and IT cloud service providers, please
estimate for 2017 the annual encryption systems processing hours (devoted to core
encryption processing, key generation and management, and other secure data storage and
transmission) to maintain interoperability.
("n" is the number of different encryption networks with which my centers/providers interoperate)
If n = 1
If n = 2

33. On average across all your organization’s data centers IT hosting services, and IT cloud
service providers, what is n (where n=number of different encryption networks with which my
centers/providers interoperate. n=1 if all organizations in all networks employ the same
algorithm)?

* 34. Do you concur with the following statement:
“As the number (n) of interoperating encryption networks increases, complexity increases, and
as complexity increases (holding everything else constant) the risk of security breaches (with
the number of breaches = s) increases.”
I concur
I do not concur
Please explain if you do not concur

22

35. If you concur, and the 5-year average number of breach notifications due to malware or
hacking for an organization very similar to yours = s, how does s vary with increases in n?

s rises linearly as a function of n

s declines linearly as a function of n

s rises exponentially as a function of n (provide the

s declines exponentially as a function of n (provide the

probable exponential power in the comment box below)

probable exponential power in the comment box below)

s remains unchanged as a function of n
Explanation (if needed)

36. What typical experiences lead you to your choice in the last question?

37. What is the average number of breach notifications due to malware or hacking your
organization has reported to federal or state authorities in the past 5 years (2013-2017)?
(We will use this number to estimate the expected number of breaches (s) when n = 1)
Average number of breach notifications reported

23

38. Assuming that AES did not exist and some level of a proliferation of encryption algorithms
ensued, pre-acquisition costs (e.g. product search costs, qualification testing costs, and
acceptance costs) for encryption hardware and software would likely have increased.
On average in 2017, across all {{ Q17 }} data centers, IT hosting services, and IT cloud service
providers, please estimate the number of full time personnel dedicated to encryption
software/hardware pre-acquisition activities, the multiple of full time personnel that would be
required in a fragmented market, and the average annual compensation (salary + benefits) of
qualified full time personnel.
Current number of preacquisition personnel
Fragmented market
multiple of preacquistion personnel
Compensation (US$)

24

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Private Sector Consumer Part 5 of 5 - Standards
Development

These last three questions refer to the diffusion of strong encryption technology as represented in the
proliferation of international standards for which AES is regarded as “indispensible” (i.e. included as a
normative reference).

39. Select all of the following consensus standards development efforts (and/or their U.S.
counterparts) in which members of your organization participated.
This list includes standards from ISO, IEEE, IETF, and CCSDS.
ISO/IEC 9564:2014 - Financial services — Personal
Identification Number (PIN) management and security

ISO/IEC 19772:2009 - Information technology -- Security
techniques -- Authenticated encryption

ISO/IEC 9797:2011 - Information technology -- Security

ISO/IEC 23001:2015 - Information technology -- MPEG

techniques -- Message Authentication Codes (MACs)

systems technologies

ISO/IEC 10116:2017 - Information technology -- Security

ISO/IEC DIS 23009:2013 - Information technology --

techniques -- Modes of operation for an n-bit block cipher

Dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP (DASH)

ISO/IEC 11568:2012 - Financial services -- Key
management (retail)

ISO/TS 24534:2011 - Road transport and Traffic
Telematics - Automatic Vehicle and Equipment

ISO/IEC 11889:2015 - Information technology -- Trusted
Platform Module
ISO/IEC 13141:2015 - Electronic fee collection -Localization augmentation communication for
autonomous systems
ISO/IEC 13157-2:2016 - Information technology -Telecommunications and information exchange between
systems -- NFC Security

Identification - Electronic Registration Identification (ERI)
for Vehicles
ISO/IEC 24767:2009 - Information technology -- Home
network security
ISO/IEC 24771:2014 - Information technology -Telecommunications and information exchange between
systems -- MAC/PHY standard for ad hoc wireless
network to support QoS in an industrial work
environment

ISO/TR 13569:2005 - Financial services -- Information
security guidelines

ISO/IEC 25185:2016 - Identification cards -- Integrated
circuit card authentication protocols

ISO/IEC 14543:2010 - Information technology -- Home
electronic system (HES) architecture

ISO/IEC 26430:2008 - Digital cinema (D-cinema)
operations

ISO/IEC 15764:2004 - Road vehicles -- Extended data

IEEE 802.1 AE: 2006 - IEEE Standard for Local and

link security
ISO/IEC 16504:2011 - Information technology --

Metropolitan Area Networks: Media Access Control
(MAC) Security

Telecommunications and information exchange between
systems -- MAC and PHY for operation in TV white

IEEE 1609.2-2016 - IEEE Standard for Wireless Access
in Vehicular Environments--Security Services for

space

Applications and Management Messages

25

ISO/IEC 18013-3:2017 - Information technology --

IEEE 1619-2007 - IEEE Standard for Cryptographic

Personal identification -- ISO-compliant driving license

Protection of Data on Block-Oriented Storage Devices

ISO/IEC 18031:2011 - Information technology -- Security
techniques -- Random bit generation

IETF RFC 6188, 2011 - The Use of AES-192 and AES256 in Secure RTP

ISO/IEC 18033-4:2011 - Information technology -Security techniques -- Encryption algorithms

IETF RFC 3602, 2003 - The AES-CBC Cipher Algorithm
and Its Use with IPSEC

ISO/IEC 19038:2005 - Banking and related financial

ETSI TS 102825, 2011 - Digital Video Broadcasting

services -- Triple DEA -- Modes of operation -Implementation guidelines

(DVB) - Content Protection and Copy Management
(DVB-CPCM)
CCSDS 352.0-B-1, 2012 - Consultative Committee for
Space Data Systems (CCSDS) CRYPTOGRAPHIC
ALGORITHM

40. If AES was not available, what would be the average additional number of hours per
standard that your organization’s personnel would have committed to all the standards
development efforts in which they participated?
Average Additional Number of Hours

41. If you believe the standards development efforts in which your organization’s personnel
participated would have been delayed in the absence of AES, estimate the average number of
months across the standards that publication would have been delayed.
Average Number of Months

26

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Cryptographic Modules/Integrator Part 1 - Modules
Data

Welcome to the Cryptographic Modules/Integrator portion of the
survey
20 questions

Please note neither NIST nor any government agency will receive the raw survey data. All survey data will be interpreted
and reported ONLY in aggregated form, as averages and ranges. No individual person, individual agency or company, or a
unit thereof will be discernable.
We DO NOT expect your estimates to be based on accounting quality data. We need you to provide your best estimates to
all questions based on your experienced judgment. If point estimates make you uncomfortable, please provide a range in
which you believe the estimate falls.
Questions with an * next to them are linked to later questions or survey logic and enable the pre-population of some
succeeding questions.

27

42. Please select all the types of hardware or software modules that your organization produced
in 2017.
Hardware - Storage - Encrypted Solid State Drives

Hardware - Encrypted Digital Cinema Projector

Hardware - Storage - Encrypted Hard Disk Drives

Hardware - Encrypted Postal Meter

Hardware - Storage - Encrypted Tape Drives

Hardware - Encrypted Telephones

Hardware - Storage - Encrypted Flash or USB Drives

Software - Cryptographic Libraries

Hardware - Network Appliance - Encrypted Routers

Software - Developer's Toolkits

Hardware - Network Appliance - Encrypted Switches
(includes Mobility controllers)

Software - Dedicated encryption processor or accelerator
(no hardware component)

Hardware - Network Appliance - Encrypted Firewalls

Software - Dedicated key management (no hardware
component)

Hardware - Network Appliance - Encrypted Network
Management
Hardware - Dedicated Encryption HSM or Encryption
Accelerator
Hardware - Dedicated Key Management HSM
Hardware - Authentication System HSM (card reader, ID
cards/chips, etc)

Software - Authentication system interface
Software - Network Appliance - Virtual Router
Software - Network Appliance - Virtual Switches
Software - Network Appliance - Virtual Firewalls
Software - Network Appliance - Virtual Network
Management

Hardware - Radios - encryption components
Other distinct products

43. In what year did your organization sell (or support the development or testing of) its first
cryptographic hardware and/or software modules?
Year

Hardware:
Software:

44. In what year did you organization sell (or support the development or testing of) its first
FIPS-validated cryptographic hardware and/or software modules?
Year

Hardware:
Software:

28

45. Approximately how many cryptographic hardware and/or software modules did your
organization produce or support (for sale or integration into “own systems”) in calendar year
2017?
2017 Total Modules

% of 2017 Modules FIPS validated

Hardware Modules:
Software Modules:
Explanation (if needed)

46. Please estimate the average annual growth rate in the hardware and/or software
modules your organization produced or supported (for sale or integration into “own systems”)
from its first sale (reported in your response Q1a) through calendar year 2017?
Average Annual Growth Rate

Hardware Units
Software Units
Additional comments (if needed)

47. For calendar year 2017, what was the sales price range for an average cryptographic
hardware and/or software module?
Sales price range in US$
Hardware module:
Software module:

29

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Cryptographic Modules/Integrator Part 2 - Counterfactual
Questions

Questions with an * next to them are linked to later questions or survey logic and enable the pre-population
of some succeeding questions.
For the questions below, the following information may be useful:
We hypothesize that strong encryption (equal to or greater than 128 bits) was “in the wind” when NIST
announced its intention to select a strong replacement for DES — through an open international
competition — in 1997. Several strong symmetric block algorithms were already in existence, including the
following:
SQUARE (precursor to Rijndael), 1997, key size of 128 bits, and a block size of 128 bits
RC5 (precursor to RC6), 1994, key size up to 2048 bits, variety of block sizes
SAFER K-128 (precursor to SAFER+), key size of 128 bits, block size of 64 bits;
Blowfish (precursor to Twofish), 1991, key size of 32-448 bits, block size of 64 bits;
IDEA, 1991, key size of 128 bits, block size of 64 bits

30

* 48. In the absence of NIST’s AES competition (1997-2001) which of the following scenarios do
you believe would have unfolded for strong cryptography (key size > 128 bits, block size > 128
bits)?
Cryptographic hardware and software module developers would have:
A - Coalesced inter-industry-wide around an alternative
strong encryption algorithm

D - Fragmented along other lines
E - None of the above. Please explain.

B - Coalesced around industry specific applications
C - Fragmented among industry subgroups (with different
groups preferring different encryption algorithms)
Explanation (if needed)

31

49. Provide some examples of which industries would choose which algorithms in the scenario
you selected above.
Please use the 2-digit industry codes and algorithms in the table below and format your answer
as "industry code, algorithm."
Industry
11 - Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting
21 - Mining
22 - Utilities
23 - Construction
31-33 - Manufacturing
42 - Wholesale Trade
44-45 - Retail Trade
48-49 - Transportation and Warehousing
51 - Information
52 - Finance and Insurance
53 - Real Estate Rental and Leasing
54 - Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
55 - Management of Companies and Enterprises
56 - Administrative and Support and Waste Management
and Remediation Services
61 - Educational Services
62 - Health Care and Social Assistance
71 - Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
72 - Accommodation and Food Services
81 - Other Services (except Public Administration)
92 - Public Administration

Algorithm
Blowfish
Camellia
CAST-256
CRYPTON
DEAL
DFC
E2
FROG
HPC
IDEA
LOKI97
MAGENTA
MARS
Proprietary
algorithms
RC5
RC6
SAFER+
SAFER K-128
Serpent
SQUARE
Twofish

32

* 50. Use the industry-algorithm pair that you are most familiar with (from above), and assuming
the AES competition never occurred, in what year do you estimate that strong symmetric
cipher would have been available for deployment in cryptographic module developer industry’s
products and services?

Explanation (if needed)

51. We understand interoperability testing to be the evaluation of the ability of the encryption
network’s nodes to communicate with each other when multiple alternative encryption
algorithms are in use.
How many person- hours did your company expend in 2017 to perform interoperability testing
and what was the average annual full time compensation (salary + benefits) of qualified
personnel who would have performed the testing?

Person hours:
Compensation (US$):

52. The cost of interoperability testing may have risen in the counterfactual absence of the NIST
AES competition.
In the context of the "absent AES" scenario that you selected, do you believe that interoperability
testing would have increased or decreased ? If so, by what multiple do you estimate that it
would have increased?

33

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Cryptographic Modules/Integrators Part 3 - Validation
Testing

The following two questions are about validation testing to obtain the NIST FIPS-140 certificates under the
Cryptographic Algorithm Validation Program (CAVP) and the Cryptographic Module Validation Program
(CMVP).

53. FIPS-140-2 validation testing is valuable to module producers because it provides valuable assurances
to buyers that producers’ equipment conforms to high standards of cryptographic security. These
assurances mean that buyers are willing to pay more for the validated product.

Please estimate the value of these validation-testing assurances, as a percent of module
average price ranges previously estimated for 2017.

Explanation (if needed)

54. FIPS-140-2 validation testing is valuable to module producers because it uncovers or confirms
implementation errors that module producers would otherwise need to be corrected, for example, by
sending technicians to test and fix bugs that were not fixed prior to module deployment. At a minimum, the
value of FIPS validation testing is the cost to producers of correcting errors found (or confirmed) in the
validation process.
Across all modules validated by your organization in a representative year, pleaseestimate the total
number of person-hours dedicated to correcting implementation errors found or confirmed in the
validation process and what is the average annual full-time compensation (salary + benefits) of
personnel with the appropriate capability to perform such tasks.

Person hours:
Compensation (US$):

34

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
Cryptographic Modules/Integrator Part 4 - Standards
Development

The following questions refer to the diffusion of strong encryption technology as represented in the
proliferation of international standards for which AES is regarded as “indispensible” (i.e., included as a
normative reference).

55. Select all of the following consensus standards development efforts (and/or their U.S.
counterparts) in which members of your organization participated.
This list includes standards from ISO, IEEE, IETF, and CCSDS.
ISO/IEC 9564:2014 - Financial services — Personal

ISO/IEC 19772:2009 - Information technology -- Security

Identification Number (PIN) management and security

techniques -- Authenticated encryption

ISO/IEC 9797:2011 - Information technology -- Security

ISO/IEC 23001:2015 - Information technology -- MPEG

techniques -- Message Authentication Codes (MACs)

systems technologies

ISO/IEC 10116:2017 - Information technology -- Security
techniques -- Modes of operation for an n-bit block cipher

ISO/IEC DIS 23009:2013 - Information technology -Dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP (DASH)

ISO/IEC 11568:2012 - Financial services -- Key
management (retail)

ISO/TS 24534:2011 - Road transport and Traffic
Telematics - Automatic Vehicle and Equipment

ISO/IEC 11889:2015 - Information technology -- Trusted

Identification - Electronic Registration Identification (ERI)
for Vehicles

Platform Module
ISO/IEC 13141:2015 - Electronic fee collection -Localization augmentation communication for
autonomous systems
ISO/IEC 13157-2:2016 - Information technology -Telecommunications and information exchange between
systems -- NFC Security

ISO/IEC 24767:2009 - Information technology -- Home
network security
ISO/IEC 24771:2014 - Information technology -Telecommunications and information exchange between
systems -- MAC/PHY standard for ad hoc wireless
network to support QoS in an industrial work
environment

ISO/TR 13569:2005 - Financial services -- Information
security guidelines

ISO/IEC 25185:2016 - Identification cards -- Integrated
circuit card authentication protocols

ISO/IEC 14543:2010 - Information technology -- Home

ISO/IEC 26430:2008 - Digital cinema (D-cinema)

electronic system (HES) architecture
ISO/IEC 15764:2004 - Road vehicles -- Extended data
link security
ISO/IEC 16504:2011 - Information technology -Telecommunications and information exchange between
systems -- MAC and PHY for operation in TV white
space

operations
IEEE 802.1 AE: 2006 - IEEE Standard for Local and
Metropolitan Area Networks: Media Access Control
(MAC) Security
IEEE 1609.2-2016 - IEEE Standard for Wireless Access
in Vehicular Environments--Security Services for
Applications and Management Messages

35

ISO/IEC 18013-3:2017 - Information technology -Personal identification -- ISO-compliant driving license

IEEE 1619-2007 - IEEE Standard for Cryptographic
Protection of Data on Block-Oriented Storage Devices

ISO/IEC 18031:2011 - Information technology -- Security
techniques -- Random bit generation

IETF RFC 6188, 2011 - The Use of AES-192 and AES256 in Secure RTP

ISO/IEC 18033-4:2011 - Information technology --

IETF RFC 3602, 2003 - The AES-CBC Cipher Algorithm

Security techniques -- Encryption algorithms

and Its Use with IPSEC

ISO/IEC 19038:2005 - Banking and related financial

ETSI TS 102825, 2011 - Digital Video Broadcasting

services -- Triple DEA -- Modes of operation -Implementation guidelines

(DVB) - Content Protection and Copy Management
(DVB-CPCM)
CCSDS 352.0-B-1, 2012 - Consultative Committee for
Space Data Systems (CCSDS) CRYPTOGRAPHIC
ALGORITHM

56. Across all of the standards development efforts in which members of your organization
participated, estimate the average number of hours per standard that your organization’s
personnel committed, and the average annual full-time compensation (salary + benefits) for
standards development participants?
Average hours per
standard
Average annual
compensation (US$)

57. If AES was not available, what is the average additional number of hours per standard
that your organization’s personnel would have committed to all the standards development
efforts in which they participated.
Average Additional Number of Hours

58. If you believe the standards development efforts in which your organization’s personnel
participated would have been delayed in the absence of AES, estimate the average number of
months across the standards that publication would have been delayed and the average lost
revenue (US$) per month’s delay.
Average Delay in
Months:
Average Lost Revenue
per Month (US$):

36

59. That AES has made an “indispensible” contribution to a number of international standards is indicative
of a valuable expansion of the international markets for products and services incorporating strong
symmetric block encryption. To the extent that these standards would have been delayed, the growth of the
related markets would have been stymied.

Please estimate the average annual growth rate of cryptographic hardware and software
modules units sold (with key size > 128 bits and block size > 128 bits) since your organization’s
first sale of strong cryptographic modules?

Explanation (if needed)

60. Given the influence that AES has had on multiple international standards, what do you
estimate the average annual growth rate for units sold would have been in the absence of
AES?

Explanation (if needed)

37

NIST Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Program Economic Impact
Study
General
Demographics

We have three brief demographics questions for you.

61. What is your current role within your organization?
CEO/CFO (non-IT technical)

Non-technical manager

CIO/CTO/CISO (executive technical role)

Technical Manager

Senior Manager reporting directly to executive

Technical Staff

Other (please specify)

62. How many years of experience do you have with IT security and/or encryption?
1-5 years

20-30 years

5-10 years

More than 30 years

10-20 years
Other (please specify)

63. Please estimate the number of your organization's full-time employees in 2017.

64. We may be interested in talking to you about your answers. If you are willing to be
contacted, please provide your email and/or best contact phone number. Thank you!
Name
Email Address
Phone Number

38