Skip to content

Conversation

@llbartekll
Copy link

Summary

  • introduce an optional top-level integrity object that lets wallets and tooling detect descriptor tampering without changing how descriptors are interpreted
  • document canonicalization (RFC 8785), message construction, signature validation for EIP-191/1271 with CAIP-10 signer IDs, JSON schema expectations, and explicit verifier UX handling

@eip-review-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

eip-review-bot commented Oct 18, 2025

File ERCS/erc-7730.md

Requires 1 more reviewers from @arein, @arikg, @lcastillo-ledger, @paoun-ledger

@eip-review-bot eip-review-bot changed the title feat: add optional integrity field amendment Update ERC-7730: add optional integrity field amendment Oct 18, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link

The commit 49b8320 (as a parent of 3f759c9) contains errors.
Please inspect the Run Summary for details.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the w-ci label Oct 18, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the w-ci label Oct 19, 2025
@arein
Copy link
Contributor

arein commented Oct 19, 2025

It's unclear to me "who" is the correct signer here. Once if've verified the signature to an address - how can I determine that this is the correct author?

My gut feeling tells me this should be out of scope for the initial ERC-7730

@llbartekll
Copy link
Author

It's unclear to me "who" is the correct signer here. Once if've verified the signature to an address - how can I determine that this is the correct author?

My gut feeling tells me this should be out of scope for the initial ERC-7730

Signature verification proves key control, not who you should trust.
Determining the “correct author” is a trust and distribution problem and should be out of scope.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants