Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

pre-hashed message in ECDSA and EdDSA #312

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jan 31, 2023
Merged

pre-hashed message in ECDSA and EdDSA #312

merged 4 commits into from
Jan 31, 2023

Conversation

yelhousni
Copy link
Collaborator

Following the signature interface, for both ECDSA and EdDSA:

// If hFunc is not provided, implementation may consider the message
// to be pre-hashed, else, will use hFunc to hash the message.

@yelhousni yelhousni requested a review from ivokub January 25, 2023 16:40
@yelhousni yelhousni mentioned this pull request Jan 26, 2023
Open
ivokub
ivokub requested changes Jan 26, 2023
View reviewed changes
internal/generator/ecdsa/template/ecdsa.go.tmpl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
internal/generator/ecdsa/template/ecdsa.go.tmpl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@yelhousni yelhousni requested a review from ivokub January 27, 2023 08:15
@Tabaie Tabaie mentioned this pull request Jan 30, 2023
Open
ivokub
ivokub approved these changes Jan 31, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@ivokub ivokub left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good and I think is good to merge as-is. Your call if you want to merge currently as-is and have later optional PR if have figured out #322 or wait and incorporate changes.

@yelhousni
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Looks good and I think is good to merge as-is. Your call if you want to merge currently as-is and have later optional PR if have figured out #322 or wait and incorporate changes.

I think we can merge now as-is since the two other PRs #313 and #314 are based on this branch. Then we can have a PR that refactor all of the 4 schemes (EdDSA, ECDSA, Schnorr, BLS) in a similar manner as per #322.

@ivokub
Copy link
Collaborator

ivokub commented Jan 31, 2023

Looks good and I think is good to merge as-is. Your call if you want to merge currently as-is and have later optional PR if have figured out #322 or wait and incorporate changes.

I think we can merge now as-is since the two other PRs #313 and #314 are based on this branch. Then we can have a PR that refactor all of the 4 schemes (EdDSA, ECDSA, Schnorr, BLS) in a similar manner as per #322.

Makes sense and I agree.

@yelhousni yelhousni merged commit 97cb629 into develop Jan 31, 2023
@yelhousni yelhousni deleted the signature/pre-hashed branch January 31, 2023 10:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@ivokub ivokub ivokub approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@yelhousni @ivokub