Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
ASv2 Onchain Registry #9431
ASv2 Onchain Registry #9431
Changes from 7 commits
b0f2d71
66b25f4
18e682e
3253456
58c1f6d
475baf2
e6a192b
9fdc55b
c5ac2b6
727cb57
2bcfadb
ef9c2e8
ec25f45
a3cd6dd
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
can you add a method signature for revokingSigners? logic doesn't have to be implemented yet but would make it a bit easier/cleaner to get started on the CK wrappers IMO, lmk what you think!
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.
do we also want to be able to un-revoke signers? is revoking permanent?
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.
hmm I think revoking is likely permanent, since the keys would be compromised? Personally think un-revoking is probably for few enough use cases that issuers should just register a new signer
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.
instead of checking against the
issuer
, should we check thatmsg.sender
is an authorized signer forissuer
? Otherwise we require issuers to use their issuer key instead of delegating this to the signers, which could be insecureThere 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.
This is meant to delete the attestation in the array and then move the last element in the array to that empty spot, to avoid having empty elements in the array. Not sure if this is needed and if the added gas costs from the complexity is worth it