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

Details-on-ARKG-instance-output #16

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

AltmannPeter
Copy link
Collaborator

This is a first draft of text that exemplifies what I meant with clarifying the use of the blind tau. It is not possible to use a generic approach for all keys since the keys differ based both on use and curve.

This is a first draft of text that exemplifies what I meant with clarifying the use of the blind tau. It is not possible to use a generic approach for all keys since the keys differ based both on use and curve.
Copy link
Member

@emlun emlun left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this misunderstands the layout of the document. This section is about the structure of ARKG in the abstract, it is not tied to any particular instantiation and in particular has nothing to do with elliptic curves. It does not have to be true in general that "each blinding key is also a private key" - that depends entirely on the instantiation of the BL parameter. It is true when BL is based on ECC, but not necessarily in general.

If anything this text should rather be in section 3, but even then I don't think I understand what you mean by "clarifying the use of the blind tau".

@AltmannPeter
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Changed the text to reflect the above comment.

I don't think I understand what you mean by "clarifying the use of the blind tau".

Given the layout clarification, my comment is not relevant for this section. We need to find a place where we can clarify that tau, once generated, will then be used differently when generating keys for a particular procedure over a particular group.

@AltmannPeter AltmannPeter requested a review from emlun April 11, 2024 07:24
Copy link
Member

@emlun emlun left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think the example needs to be quite so specific, I think it's fine as is. 🙂

@emlun emlun force-pushed the main branch 2 times, most recently from ca75d5f to d150098 Compare May 24, 2024 17:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants