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.

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

Transparency in signing records #89

Open
redransil opened this issue May 16, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

Transparency in signing records #89

redransil opened this issue May 16, 2023 · 0 comments

Comments

@redransil
Copy link
Contributor

Currently, when we sign a record using CO2.Storage the CID of the record pops up in Metamask. Are we signing the record or signing the CID of the record?

Benefits to signing the record directly instead of the CID:

  • It would be more transparent to the end user what they are signing
  • It's simpler from a data model perspective to go (record -> signature) instead of (record -> CID -> signature)

Is it important to sign the CID of the record instead of the record itself? One benefit is that the CID is fixed length (and almost always shorter than the actual data) which probably makes it computationally faster?

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant