Skip to content
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

Support base58 encoded public keys #127

Closed
oed opened this issue Aug 19, 2020 · 1 comment · Fixed by #139
Closed

Support base58 encoded public keys #127

oed opened this issue Aug 19, 2020 · 1 comment · Fixed by #139
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@oed
Copy link
Contributor

oed commented Aug 19, 2020

Currently this library supports publicKeyHex for ES256K and publicKeyBase64 for x25519. However the did spec seems to be converging on the use of publicKeyBase58 everywhere.

Describe the solution you'd like
The library should not assume that a specific key has a specific encoding. The most reasonable thing here seems to be to add support for all of the three encodings above for all key types.

@mirceanis mirceanis self-assigned this Aug 20, 2020
@mirceanis mirceanis added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 20, 2020
mirceanis pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 10, 2020
* chore: remove utf8 dep

* fix: support multiple public key encodings

* fix: add test for base58 encoded public keys

fixes #128
fixes #127
uport-automation-bot pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 10, 2020
## [4.6.3](4.6.2...4.6.3) (2020-11-10)

### Bug Fixes

* support multiple pubkey encodings ([#139](#139)) ([c4ae63a](c4ae63a)), closes [#128](#128) [#127](#127)
@uport-automation-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

🎉 This issue has been resolved in version 4.6.3 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants