Finalise Signature

[sshmatrix]

Finalise Signature formatting

INPS Keygen:

let statement = `Requesting signature for IPNS key generation\n\nUsername: ${ens}\nSigned By: ${caip10}`

Record Signatures:

string memory _req = string.concat(
    "Requesting signature for off-chain ENS record\n",
    //"\nIMPORTANT: Please verify the integrity and authenticity of connected Off-chain ENS Records Manager before signing this message\n",
    "\nENS Domain: ",
    _domain,
    "\nRecord Type: ",
    _jsonPath,
    "\nRecord Hash: 0x",
    bytesToString(abi.encodePacked(keccak256(result)), 0),
    "\nSigned By: eip155:1:",
    toChecksumAddress(_signer)
);

[0xc0de4c0ffee]

bytes memory _result = abi.encode(_addr);
bytes memory _response = abi.encodePacked(resolver.__callback.selector, abi.encode(_signer, _signature, _result));

signature request format

string memory _req = string.concat(
    "Requesting signature for off-chain ENS record\n",
    //"\nIMPORTANT: Please verify the integrity and authenticity of connected Off-chain ENS Records Manager before signing this message\n",
    "\nENS Domain: ",
    _domain,
    "\nRecord Type: ",
    _jsonPath,
    "\nRecord Hash: 0x",
    bytesToString(abi.encodePacked(keccak256(result)), 0),
    "\nSigned By: eip155:1:",
    toChecksumAddress(_signer)
);

[sshmatrix]

@0xc0de4c0ffee

Can you also confirm this format for keygen for the final version:

let statement = `Requesting signature for IPNS key generation\n\nUsername: ${ens}\nSigned By: ${caip10}`

So far I have put username as domain.eth and the user can choose the password/secret-key-identifier. I found it easier than to remember two things: username + password. What do you think?

[0xc0de4c0ffee]

🤔

let statement = Requesting Signature For Off-Chain ENS Records Manager\n\nENS Domain: ${ens}\nExtradata: 0x${<keccak256(ens, password?password:"", caip10)>}\nSigned By: ${caip10} * check https://github.com/orgs/namesys-eth/discussions/18 too

2x hkdf to generate secp256k1 (records signer/manager) and ed25519 (IPNS) keys from same signature request
setup signer and ipns hash in same tx using fastSetup(..) function in resolver (rename function :p)
sign records with that deterministic secp256k1 key and publish with IPNs keys, so clients don't have to request wallet to sign individual records.

++still have to lookup if there's side-effect from reusing FIPS hash to priv key in 2 different curve.N values.

[0xc0de4c0ffee]

or 2x signature request is good enough?? no more signature requests to wallets.. it's possible for owner keys to sign as optional & we can generate extra individual IPNS/Manager keys if users require one/another.

let A = Requesting signature for Deterministic IPNS key\n\nENS Domain: ${ens}\nExtradata: 0x${<keccak256(ens, password?password:"", caip10)>}\nSigned By: ${caip10}

let B = Requesting signature for Deterministic Off-Chain ENS Records Manager key\n\nENS Domain: ${ens}\nExtradata: 0x${<keccak256(ens, password?password:"", caip10)>}\nSigned By: ${caip10}

(A) for IPNS & (B) for record manager/signer using same username/ENS domain and password.

[sshmatrix]

I'll add comments on the other thread https://github.com/orgs/namesys-eth/discussions/18

[sshmatrix]

let B = Requesting signature for Deterministic Off-Chain ENS Records Manager key\n\nENS Domain: ${ens}\nExtradata: 0x${<keccak256(ens, password?password:"", caip10)>}\nSigned By: ${caip10}

Can we change this to short version:

... Deterministic Off-Chain ENS Records Manager key to ... Off-Chain ENS Records Manager

[0xc0de4c0ffee]

it's ok, we've to settle somewhere..

I'd suggest not using "Domain: .." only as it's keyword used for SIWx ABNF validation to requesting domain.com/App..

[0xc0de4c0ffee]

"Username:" or "ENS Domain:"??

[sshmatrix]

Either way is good :P