-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 536
Add support for deterministic signatures #1104
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
Conversation
FTR Knot DNS does that by default, and we plan on doing so in BIND if OpenSSL version is new enough: https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/bind9/-/merge_requests/9128 |
I also just consulted some cryptographers and so far everyone prefers deterministic due to risks from problems and even biases in random number generators, so I'm willing to go with "default on" at this point. |
Should we call this option |
I don't feel super strongly, but my preference is "deterministic" as that's what the RFC and crypto experts seem to call it, and omitting "_signing" because it's a parameter to the sign() function |
Type check error fixed in #1105 |
Can you rebase off of the current main and then re-run tests? In addition to the thing which made the CI fail, which may be fixed by 1105, I still saw an instance of |
All tests succeeds here now. |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1104 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 93.86% 93.86%
=======================================
Files 144 144
Lines 13404 13408 +4
Branches 2611 2611
=======================================
+ Hits 12581 12586 +5
Misses 486 486
+ Partials 337 336 -1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Merged, thanks! |
First cut at support for deterministic signatures, feedback requested.