Skip to content

This PR updates the Cryptography introduction section in the epf.wiki page #418

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

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

Conversation

owanikin
Copy link

@owanikin owanikin commented Apr 9, 2025

This PR makes changes to the Cryptography introduction section by expanding on it, adding IMO some cryptography core primitives and protocol roles in Ethereum.

@raxhvl
Copy link
Member

raxhvl commented Apr 10, 2025

Hi @owanikin

Potential typos found in your PR:

  • 📄 ./docs/wiki/Cryptography/intro.md (line(s) 51):
    1. blst
  • 📄 ./docs/wiki/Cryptography/intro.md (line(s) 51):
    1. herumi
  • 📄 ./docs/wiki/Cryptography/intro.md (line(s) 98):
    1. STARKS

ℹ️ How to fix:

  1. If these are actual typos:

    • Open the files at the specified line numbers and fix them
  2. If these are names or one-off nouns:

    • Wrap them in <name> tags
    • Example: <name>Alex Pereira</name>
    • Use this for people's names or unique terms that appear rarely
  3. If these are valid terms:

    • Add them to wordlist.txt (one word per line)
    • Terms must be plain text without spaces/special chars
    • The list is case-insensitive
  4. If these are code terms:

    • Wrap them in backticks (`) in your markdown

ℹ️ Checking for typos locally

  1. Install aspell for your platform
  2. Navigate to project root and run:
for f in **/*.md ; do echo $f ; aspell --lang=en_US --mode=markdown --home-dir=. --personal=wordlist.txt --ignore-case=true --camel-case --add-sgml-skip nospellcheck list < $f | sort | uniq -c ; done

Learn more about wordlist format


Unlike account abstraction models (ERC-4337), EOAs require signatures for every operation.

The v, r, s signature format has historical quirks—legacy transactions use v ∈ {27, 28}, while EIP-1559 defines v ∈ {0, 1} to prevent replay attacks.
Copy link
Member

@raxhvl raxhvl Apr 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
The v, r, s signature format has historical quirks—legacy transactions use v ∈ {27, 28}, while EIP-1559 defines v ∈ {0, 1} to prevent replay attacks.
The v, r, s signature format has historical quirks—legacy transactions use v ∈ {27, 28}, while EIP-155 defines v ∈ {0, 1} to prevent replay attacks.

Do you mean EIP-155?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yes correct, EIP-155 is what i mean.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants