José I. O.

To my knowledge, ECDSA was favored in Mobile due to its smaller key sizes. Same rationale is valid for blockchains so the transactions and the blocks are small. Example public...

$ node ex2.js MSG::ab33e548697ee88e41a6b7600bff49bc812887f4335d424c2cba43cf56c48402 PrivKey::3dfac442d5059f2a9ab28a156b5c181b979ebed9f4254f3bac4b8e1ec156317a PubKey::0395dadf30bda5c16fa0d39efa57631895edc129bcf4da2c1476e740c526f0ff3c Signature::3fc64c9a62ba6fe6dde7aa888073d56c46a3ca23e8d6227f9e7c8f077edf46ca03671e1736cde40f47b75ab447c566918f365ea8573cf74434c3d2ae9fc64aab true Ethereum Adress:::0x5be9e8687aea7f500b44df566bb984dd67b8f26c

[Noble secp256k1](https://github.com/paulmillr/noble-secp256k1) apparently is faster and has better security. Maybe later...

https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/99779/how-to-encrypt-with-ecdsa

@LNow thanks for you comment. I improved the Rationale with 3 cases where the current approach for doing a 2-hop DeFi Composability (User using a Yield Aggregator service using a...

@MarvinJanssen you cannot call `approve` allowance from another contract because only the contract caller can approve its own allowance. If they convince you on Phishing to send a `approve` allowance...

> If the approval checks for contract-caller, then contracts need to use as-contract and are in the same position as with transfer and we haven't won anything. Updated: yep, you...

> > With the current approach they can literally sell the control of your `tx-sender` in a Phishing market once they convince you and drain any SIP10. > > That...

> > I thinks PCs are a great addendum to security but in case a third-party want to integrate my Web3 service I cannot enforce them to call my service...

@jcnelson @LNow I think this is a productive discussion. Something that can also be secure in my opinion is to have post-conditions in Traits, so you implement SIP10 or a...