*Secured Storage Mechanism for the Cloud-Based Banking Applications Using ECC DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107931*

server. With the help of this, the performance can be checked with load balance. Single usage of customized SOAP UI can trigger 1000 users at a time in the cloud storage server. Logs are stored in the database table as well as in the server and client system based on the load balance testing and performance tracking below **Table 2**. Shows the various comparisons of the proposed and existing systems in the Cloud storage mechanism [1].

Below **Table 3** ECC and RSA key size strength ratios are measured in the table; for example, the RSA system requires 7680 bits to provide security, whereas ECC requires only a 384-bit key to acquire the security and its key ratio stands at 1:20. So ECC provides greater efficiency in terms of key size and bandwidth; it means higher speed and lower power consumption [1].

**Figure 7** discusses the key length comparison of the proposed ECC algorithm vs. the existing RSA algorithm [1].

The public key operation of ECC-160 is only 3.69 milliseconds, and it is 50% comparatively lesser than RSA-1024 and other keys. The flowchart given below explains the key generation time and required memory size for both ECC key and 1024-bit RSA key, 160-bit ECC is much better than RSA [13]. The protection measures for both 160-bit ECC key and 1024-bit RSA key are similar. Hence breaking


#### **Table 2.**

*Comparison between existing and proposed framework.*


#### **Table 3.**

*Key size strength ratio for the proposed system.*

### **Figure 7.**

*Key length comparison for proposed and existing.*


#### **Table 4.**

*Measure of proposed ECC vs existing RSA public keys.*

a 160-bit key would be a hundred million times harder than breaking the 1024-bit key. In below **Table 4**, discuss the measure of proposed ECC versus existing RSA public keys.

In **Table 4**, the proposed public key is generated using the existing key algorithm, based on key generation time (ms), memory size (bytes), and encryption/decryption time. During the ECC key generation, the time taken to generate the RSA key and ECC key and size has a huge difference (ECC-224 and RSA-2048). Also, it is learned that during the signature generation process, ECC surpasses RSA. Conversely, *Secured Storage Mechanism for the Cloud-Based Banking Applications Using ECC DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107931*

#### **Figure 8.**

*Proposed algorithm encryption/decryption during runtime.*

**Figure 9.** *Algorithm key generation time (ms).*

RSA beats ECC in performance during the verification process and the Encryption/ Decryption process is ECC much better than RSA. The below **Figure 8** shows the encryption and decryption time during the run time of the proposed public key algorithm [13, 14].

The below **Figures 9**–**12** discusses the key size generation time, required memory size, and encryption/decryption time of the proposed ECC algorithm vs. the Existing RAS algorithm.
