-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 45
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
Update RPO with a comment on security given domain separation #320
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good! Thank you! I left a couple of small comments inline. Once these are addressed, we can merge.
@@ -52,6 +53,17 @@ mod tests; | |||
/// to deserialize them into field elements and then hash them using | |||
/// [hash_elements()](Rpo256::hash_elements) function rather then hashing the serialized bytes | |||
/// using [hash()](Rpo256::hash) function. | |||
/// | |||
/// ## Domain separation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we make similar comments for the Rpx256 struct?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Add an adapted comment to RPX
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
All looks good! Thank you!
Describe your changes
Checklist before requesting a review
next
according to naming convention.