-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 67
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.
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
multisig - signature format #23
Comments
"multisig" is better known as an obvious (and general) solution to threshold signatures. A multisig signature consists of "multiple signatures". I.e. Alice and Bob within a group of Alice, Bob, Carol, Dave; co-signed an object on behalf of the group - not just themselves. Multisig is commonly referenced within the cryptocurrency community. FWIW: An ideal threshold signature (like Schnorr signatures; I.e. ed25519) is identical to a signature form a single party, requiring no difference in the representation nor verification process. If you plan to support "multisig (list)" in "multisig (this project)", you will need to support .. lists. Alternatively you may consider each signature independent and leave the rest to the application. Unfortunately, I do not have any alternative naming suggestions for identifying signatures, especially within this collection of "multi*". |
Naming problems aside; I would really like to see this distinct kind of multiformat but in addition to something like Regarding the structure, I'd propose the following:
Where signature is the signed bytes of the hash defined by The format and padding information would yield distinct DSA types such as:
Regarding naming: given the specific attention to signatures and key material (ipfs/specs#58) and the inevitable attention that encryption will draw soon, it may be worthwhile to consider a
Where
|
For storing signatures. Should be analogous to
multikey
(ipfs/specs#58).Note: this is just a quick writeup, up for debate.
Following the usual structure:
<schema type><size><signature>
Signature itself is defined as:
Unspecified:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: