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

Do you have plans to implement Schnorr signatures? #34

Open
wigy-opensource-developer opened this issue Jan 31, 2020 · 3 comments
Open

Do you have plans to implement Schnorr signatures? #34

wigy-opensource-developer opened this issue Jan 31, 2020 · 3 comments

Comments

@wigy-opensource-developer
Copy link

I know it is a bit of a Pandora's box with 2 incompatible implementations, but there are projects using Schnorr signatures with secp256k1 private keys, and there are some privacy advantages of it in multi-signature use-cases over the legacy script-based BTC multi-signature.

Do you have it on the roadmap or are you willing to accept a PR if I start on an implementation?
@sorpaas
Copy link
Member

sorpaas commented Jan 31, 2020

@wigy-opensource-developer We're willing to accept PRs on this if you have an implementation!

@wigy-opensource-developer
Copy link
Author

Well, not yet, but soon I will have to implement something for ARK AIP-11 compatibility, and binding to a C library is something we would like to avoid for a crypto library.

@willeslau
Copy link

Hi all, is this implemented? If not, are PRs still welcomed today?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@wigy-opensource-developer @sorpaas @willeslau