You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Based on the #203 , last @jot2re comments say the same.
For NFT attestation currently User signs
simple text string as CSR (Certificate Signing Request)
whole object IdAttestation+NFTpayload and add signature to the object
My suggestion is to separate IdAttestation and NFTpayload
So
user creates NFTpayload object. HASH it , adds it to the text template and sign that string. ("Sign to create your TwitterID attestation. nonce: 0x45a8b78... , timestamp: 3992770271")
user send HASH+template+timestamp+users_string_signature+auth0_data to the attestation.id (attestation.id creates string and validate it against signature)
construct object; IdAttestation+payload+step1_string_signature to the smart contract
in this case IdAttestation signed by attestor, payload signed by user. attestation.id dont know what payload do we use and user need to make single signature only.
In case if Attestation TTL limited to 1 day, then it fix multiple problems:
CSR reuse
IdAttestation reuse when twitterId sold
avoid weird signature
avoid double signing
If @JamesSmartCell can update VerificationContract to read EIP712 signature then we can use EIP712 instead of the text.
@colourful-land , does that make sense?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Based on the #203 , last @jot2re comments say the same.
For NFT attestation currently User signs
My suggestion is to separate IdAttestation and NFTpayload
So
in this case IdAttestation signed by attestor, payload signed by user. attestation.id dont know what payload do we use and user need to make single signature only.
In case if Attestation TTL limited to 1 day, then it fix multiple problems:
If @JamesSmartCell can update VerificationContract to read EIP712 signature then we can use EIP712 instead of the text.
@colourful-land , does that make sense?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: