Isolate crypto stuff and avoid dealing with leaking SecretKey
#365
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
That3Percent
approved these changes
Jul 7, 2020
|
Thanks for reviewing this PR, merging then. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Follow up on #358 (review)
This PR re-organizes the code using crypto stuff into
signing.rsmodule and hidessecp256k1details behind theSigntrait.The purpose of this is to avoid handling
SecretKeyand needing to zeroize or protect it at any point in time, rather this responsibility is passed to the users of the library.Secondly this should make it easier to switch to a different (for instance
no-stdcompatible) version ofsecp256k1(likelibsecp256k1) in the future sincesecp256k1is not part of the public API any more.This might be a little bit more cumbersome to use, we can possibly provide examples if that becomes an issue.
CC @That3Percent @cheme :)