Comparative Analysis of AES and Blowfish in Cloud Storage Encryption
Authors
School of Sciences, Department of Computer Science Kwara State College of Education, Ilorin (Nigeria)
Department of Computer Science, Ajayi Crowther University, Oyo Oyo State (Nigeria)
Department of Computer Science Kwara State Polytechnic (Nigeria)
Department of Computer Science, Ajayi Crowther University, Oyo Oyo State (Nigeria)
Department of Computer Science, Ajayi Crowther University, Oyo Oyo State (Nigeria)
Article Information
DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI.2025.12110138
Subject Category: Data security in the cloud
Volume/Issue: 12/11 | Page No: 1563-1571
Publication Timeline
Submitted: 2025-12-02
Accepted: 2025-12-08
Published: 2025-12-19
Abstract
Cloud storage requires efficient and secure encryption to ensure data confidentiality.This study evaluates and compares the performance of the AES and Blowfish encryption algorithms with the aim of determining which algorithm offers superior efficiency and reliability for secure data processing. The specific objectives are to measure and analyze their encryption time, execution time, throughput, and Mean Square Error (MSE) across multiple experimental runs. MATLAB was used as the primary methodology for implementing both algorithms, generating datasets, executing repeated trials, and computing performance metrics. Execution time values were recorded for twenty samples, where AES consistently produced lower times such as 72 s, 154 s, 95 s, 78 s, 25 s, and a minimum of 9.1 s, while Blowfish recorded higher corresponding values including 106 s, 213 s, 138 s, 136 s, 31 s, and a minimum of 10 s. Comparative averages further showed that AES achieved a lower overall execution range, indicating faster computational behaviour. Throughput values also demonstrated AES superiority, with sample values above 1.00, while Blowfish maintained lower throughput levels. MSE analysis revealed significantly lower values for AES, such as 59.88, compared to Blowfish’s much higher 126.83, indicating better data accuracy and reduced distortion during encryption and decryption. The bar and line graph analyses confirmed AES’s consistent performance advantage across all metrics. The results demonstrate that AES outperforms Blowfish in terms of speed, efficiency, and reliability. In conclusion, AES is better suited for high-performance encryption applications requiring fast execution and accurate data reconstruction. Blowfish, although functional, shows slower and more inconsistent behaviour, making it less ideal for time-critical or high-volume security systems.
Keywords
Cloud security, AES, Blowfish, encryption performance, Data Protection
Downloads
References
1. Abubakar Z. M., Bala M., Mohammed U. & Ahmed. M. K. (2025). Application of Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) for Securing Electronic Banking Transactional Data.DOI: https://doi.org/10.51584/IJRIAS.2025.100800074 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
2. Al Maqtari, E. A., & Al Maqtari, E. A. (2024).Performance evaluation for AES, Blowfish, DES, and 3DES cryptography algorithms.Partners Universal Innovative Research Publication, 2(5), 86–95.https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13974870 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
3. Bello Buhari, A., AfolayanAyodeleObiniyi, A., Kissinger, S., &Sirajo, S. (2019). Performance evaluation of symmetric data encryption algorithms: AES and Blowfish. Saudi Journal of Engineering and Technology (SJEAT), 4(10), 407–414.https://doi.org/10.36348/SJEAT.2019.v04i10.002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
4. Devi, A., Sharma, A., &Rangra, A. (2015). Performance analysis of symmetric key algorithms: DES, AES and Blowfish for image encryption and decryption. International Journal of Engineering and Computer Science, 4(06). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
5. Dhamala, N., & Acharya, K. P. (2024). A comparative analysis of DES, AES and Blowfish based DNA cryptography. Adhyayan Journal, 11(11), 69–80.https://doi.org/10.3126/aj.v11i11.67080 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
6. Ebtihal A. A.&Elham A. A. (2024).PerformanceEvaluation for AES, Blowfish, DES, and 3DES Cryptography Algorithms. Partners Universal Innovative Research Publication (PUIRP), 02(05), 86–95. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13974870 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
7. Koukou, Y. M., Othman, S. H., &HerveNkiama, M. M. (2016).Comparative study of AES, Blowfish, CAST 128 and DES encryption algorithm.IOSR Journal of Engineering, 6(6), 1–7.https://doi.org/10.9790/3021-066010107 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
8. Timur, M. B. B., Royansyah, R., &Kusumaningsih, D. (2025).Comparison of efficiency and security of AES, Blowfish, and ChaCha20 cryptographic algorithms on image and document files.Innovatics Journal, 7(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
9. Venkatesh V, Swathi L, Tangudu N. and Satishkumar, E S. (2025).Implementation and Evaluation of Data Protection in Databases Using Symmetric Encryption Algorithms.J Neonatal Surg [Internet]. 2025, Mar.24 [cited 2025Nov.30];14(8S):440-59. Available from: https://www.jneonatalsurg.com/index.php/jns/article/view/2558DOI: https://doi.org/10.52783/jns.v14.2558 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]