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.

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

Add key and signature types into Signature message #55

Closed
realloc opened this issue Aug 18, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #197
Closed

Add key and signature types into Signature message #55

realloc opened this issue Aug 18, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #197
Assignees

Comments

@realloc
Copy link

realloc commented Aug 18, 2020

NeoFS uses different key and signature types, but this knowledge is not reflected directly in protocol definitions, only in code.

Signature structure needs to have key type reference and signature algorithm reference.

@realloc
Copy link
Author

realloc commented May 20, 2021

As an alternative approach, we could consider using multihash format for storing signature. However, if we add a Signature hash type field, functionally it would be almost the same thing. Need to discuss what's better in the long run.

@fyrchik
Copy link
Contributor

fyrchik commented Feb 7, 2022

I see 2 problems with multihash:

  1. The codec in header describes only the type of data, not the signature algorithm https://github.com/multiformats/multicodec/blob/master/table.csv. So sha512 can mean both ECDSA and EdDSA and we still need another field).
  2. It can be hard to add new algorithms there (for local regulations or custom requirements) without effectively forking the whole multicodec or multihash repo.

@cthulhu-rider
Copy link
Contributor

Also we have some need to work with WalletConnect (c) @realloc

cthulhu-rider pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 22, 2022
Signed-off-by: Evgenii Stratonikov <evgeniy@nspcc.ru>
cthulhu-rider pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 22, 2022
Signed-off-by: Evgenii Stratonikov <evgeniy@nspcc.ru>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants