-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
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
Split out blind sign functionality into a seperate draft #42
Conversation
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.
strong +1 to splitting this... hopefully it can proceed faster.
draft-bbs-signatures.md
Outdated
1. Signatures can be created blinded or un-blinded. | ||
|
||
2. Traditional signature schemes require the entire signature and message to be disclosed during verification. BBS allows a fast and small zero-knowledge signature proof of knowledge to be created from the signature and the public key. This allows the signature holder to selectively reveal any number of signed messages to another entity (none, all, or any number in between). | ||
1. Traditional signature schemes require the entire signature and message to be disclosed during verification. BBS allows a fast and small zero-knowledge signature proof of knowledge to be created from the signature and the public key. This allows the signature holder to selectively reveal any number of signed messages to another entity (none, all, or any number in between). |
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.
This could probably be restructured since there's only 1 point.
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.
Have restructured now thanks @andrewwhitehead
fdaee11
to
8e6742c
Compare
Multiple approvals, open multiple days, discussed on previous working group call and in #28, no net change in functionality just splitting it across two documents can re-merge later if required, merging. |
Following discussion in the working group chat and conversation in issues #29 and #28. This PR attempts to move this forward by splitting the current draft into two: