## 6 Analysis of Proposed E-Commerce Apps' Reliability and Effectiveness
### Performance Results and Discussion  
The proposed protocol's encryption algorithms were implemented using Java on an Ubuntu 18.04.6 LTS system. The computer used for the study is equipped with an Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2540M CPU and has 4.00 MB of RAM. To assess the execution time of encoding and decoding in the proposed algorithm, tests were conducted 100 times in Java, and the results were collected. The numerical data obtained were then analyzed in Libre Calc on Ubuntu to generate performance figures and graphs, which will be discussed later. Figure 7 illustrates the original FER algorithm's encryption and decryption time, showing that the decryption process is quicker and has a shorter execution time compared to the encryption process.  
Figure 8 presents the encryption and decryption speed of the proposed protocol, which combines the ELG and FER algorithms. Each operation in the algorithm, such as text encryption and decryption, iterates 100 times. The slight variation in the speed of encryption and decryption is influenced by the data size each time. The results indicate that the encryption process requires more time compared to decryption. Nevertheless, the overall performance of the encryption and decryption operations remains efficient, with the highest execution time for encryption and decryption being only 0.025 ms.  
Figures 9 and 10 show the performance of purchasing and payment orders by performing the orders' encryption and decryption processes in the proposed approach.  
Figure 8: Execution times for encryption and decryption using the proposed algorithm.  
Figure 7: Time required for encryption and decryption for the original Fermet 256-bit.  
Figure 11 depicts the performance of the DLD technique in the proposed protocol through the execution time process of encryption, decryption and key generation. In our proposed protocol, we use DLD technology to detect data leakage and protect the information; however, a data breach or attack cannot be ruled out. We utilize the ELG algorithm to generate a key with a size of 1024, although keys of different sizes and lengths, such as 2048, can also be used. Orders information is exchanged between the \(\mathcal{M}\) and the \(TS\) in a single network; it can be redeemed for a group of service servers across a range of networks.  
Figure 11: Evaluation of DLD performance depending on the execution time for encryption and decryption and key generation.  
Figure 10: Execution time for the payment request encryption and decryption.  
Figure 9: Execution time for the purchasing request encryption and decryption.  
In Table 2, we present a comparison of execution times between our proposed protocol and existing protocols. Although there are some variations in algorithms, parameters, and environments, this comparison demonstrates the fairness of our protocol's implementation. As shown in Table 2, our protocol achieves the best execution time among existing protocols for both encryption and decryption operations. When compared to [PERSON] et al. [42], our protocol outperforms theirs, even though they modified the AES algorithm to enhance cryptographic processing speed. However, their protocol lacks the scalability that our protocol, utilizing ELG, offers. Furthermore, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [43] employed DES for encryption, but DES is considered compromised based on recent research and is not suitable for safeguarding sensitive information like merchant data. On the other hand, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [15] used ELG/AES, [PERSON] [44] used RSA/AES, and [PERSON] et al. [45] used RSA/Blowfish. They incorporated both symmetric and asymmetric cryptography algorithms into their encryption and decryption processes, resulting in increased complexity. In contrast, our protocol relies solely on ELG for generating random keys and FER for performing encryption operations, making it lightweight and efficient for e-commerce applications.