Implement partial equality for key types #102
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Justin Abrahms <[email protected]>
justinabrahms
approved these changes
Nov 22, 2023
conradoplg
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Expands on #101 with constant-time comparison for SigningKey.
I wasn't sure about wheter implementing PartialEq for SigningKey is a good idea or not. On one hand, for tests, it's possible to simple convert it into
[u8; 32]and compare that. But on the other hand we take the risk of people doing that for non-test code where constant-time comparison is required. I chose to address the risk and create this PR based on the contributor's PR.There is also some precedence for it, e.g. https://docs.rs/elliptic-curve/latest/elliptic_curve/struct.SecretKey.html#impl-PartialEq-for-SecretKey%3CC%3E