-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 57
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
introduce secp operators #303
Conversation
6f78a67
to
6b8585a
Compare
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 5203783675
💛 - Coveralls |
@rostislav pointed out that there's a reason for k1 to be about twice as fast as r1. so maybe it would make sense to reflect that in the cost |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Seems good
ec20a10
to
f47c57b
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I haven't looked too closely since last time. But I thought I'd approve it anyway since my understanding is only the costs have changed.
This is a softfork activated by
ENABLE_SECP_OPERATORS
. It's based on @cameroncooper 's patch which implements verification of secp256k1 and secp256r1 signatures.The two new operators are:
secp256k1_verify
secp256r1_verify
The message digest parameter must be the sha256 of the message to sign.
This is best reviewed one commit at a time.