From 1226c0dde2a8379f1ec0fad6099357dc3dcb60e5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Florian Dold Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 19:36:24 +0200 Subject: DD18 question --- design-documents/018-contract-json.rst | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/design-documents/018-contract-json.rst b/design-documents/018-contract-json.rst index 2bc147b1..7c626007 100644 --- a/design-documents/018-contract-json.rst +++ b/design-documents/018-contract-json.rst @@ -126,6 +126,9 @@ The hash of a member value ``memb_val`` with salt ``memb_salt`` is computed as f salt: memb_salt, }); +When encoding ``memb_salted_hash`` with base32-crockford, the resulting output +must be upper-case. + Scrubbing --------- @@ -165,3 +168,6 @@ Discussion / Q&A forgetting a member. This would save storage. But to prove that a certain forgettable info matches the contract terms, the prover would need to also store/provide the salt. + +* What validations should the wallet do? Should the wallet ever accept + contract terms where fields are already forgotten? -- cgit v1.2.3