Skip to content

Conversation

@CluEleSsUK
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@CluEleSsUK CluEleSsUK requested a review from AnomalRoil June 23, 2023 07:57
Copy link
Member

@AnomalRoil AnomalRoil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM I guess, but would be nice to avoid carrying that tech debt of retro-compat of non-compliant verification forever.

Comment on lines +64 to +65
// default DST is the invalid one used for 'bls-unchained-on-g1' for backwards compat
domainSeparationTag= 'BLS_SIG_BLS12381G2_XMD:SHA-256_SSWU_RO_NUL_'
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Gosh, I hate this. But I guess it's the only way not to break things for people T.T
Are we sure people are actually using this function directly?
Could we avoid doing this? In the code above we could be explicit for each scheme...

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

we could make it mandatory, but we'd have to bump to v2 to make sure nobody gets pwned by it

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Have raised an issue here: #70

@CluEleSsUK CluEleSsUK merged commit e31f33a into master Jul 3, 2023
@CluEleSsUK CluEleSsUK deleted the feature/support-for-g1-rfc9380 branch July 3, 2023 11:21
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 this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants