{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/kmackay/micro-ecc/issues/37","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/kmackay/micro-ecc/issues/37/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/kmackay/micro-ecc/issues/37/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/kmackay/micro-ecc/issues/37/events","html_url":"https://github.com/kmackay/micro-ecc/issues/37","id":76937824,"number":37,"title":"Deterministic signing?","user":{"login":"ricmoo","id":975687,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/975687?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/ricmoo","html_url":"https://github.com/ricmoo","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ricmoo/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ricmoo/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ricmoo/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ricmoo/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ricmoo/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ricmoo/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ricmoo/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ricmoo/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ricmoo/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":18,"created_at":"2015-05-16T04:11:06Z","updated_at":"2015-06-19T02:41:25Z","closed_at":null,"body":"I was wondering if you were thinking of implementing deterministic signing (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6979)? If not, I am planning to, and was wondering if you would be interested in a pull request.\r\n\r\nI would introduce it as a new function `int uECC_sign_deterministic(...)` so one could still choose a non-deterministic signature."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/kmackay/micro-ecc/issues/comments/113348407","html_url":"https://github.com/kmackay/micro-ecc/issues/37#issuecomment-113348407","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/kmackay/micro-ecc/issues/37","id":113348407,"user":{"login":"concise","id":830849,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/830849?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/concise","html_url":"https://github.com/concise","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/concise/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/concise/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/concise/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/concise/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/concise/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/concise/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/concise/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/concise/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/concise/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-06-19T02:41:25Z","updated_at":"2015-06-19T02:41:25Z","body":"> I don't see any reason to use bits2octets for k or message_hash. It doesn't add any security, and it increases the code size and signing time.\r\n\r\nThat's a good call.  The only possible reason of the additional code size and computation time is for testing the correctness against other RFC 6979 implementations, if anyone is interested.\r\n\r\n> As far as I can tell the expected number of tries should be approximately 2\r\n\r\nOh, that is a good catch.  For some stupid reason, I thought the integer outputted from `bits2int()` is 168-bit, but it should be only 161-bit long.  Therefore you are right about the successful probability of each trial to be 0.5.  Thanks for correcting that!"}}