deterministic ECDSA SHOULD be used #34
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Wind4Greg
requested review from
msporny,
martyr280 and
seabass-labrax
as code owners
martyr280
approved these changes
Aug 21, 2023
dlongley
approved these changes
Aug 21, 2023
…consideration section to avoid a normative term. Co-authored-by: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>
|
Good catch @dlongley! |
TallTed
requested changes
Aug 21, 2023
No normative changes.
…c-di-ecdsa into deterministic-should
dlongley
reviewed
Aug 23, 2023
Co-authored-by: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>
msporny
approved these changes
Sep 2, 2023
|
Normative, multiple reviews, changes requested and made, no objections, merging. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR addresses issue #28. To require that the deterministic ECDSA algorithm SHOULD be used. Previously we just had that the ECDSA algorithm MUST be used without explicitly pointing out the security advantages of the deterministic variant.
In the security considerations section has been slightly extended to offer a reason why, in some situations, one might not want to use the deterministic variant. This section already explains why in most cases one should use the deterministic variant.
Note that the security considerations section already points out that verification of signatures is the same for both variants.
Preview | Diff