Ethereum Evolution: Why was ECDSA selected above Schnorr’s signatures
Ethereum, one of the most popular and successful blockchain platforms, has undergone significant transformations since its inception in 2014. One of the main decisions that affected this evolution in the area
In this article, we will explore why ECDSA was selected above Schnorr’s signatures in the original Ethereum design.
ECDSA and Schnorr’s signature background
Before diving into details, let’s briefly review these two signature schemes. The ECDSA is a widely used digital signature algorithm that allows users to sign messages using their own private keys from their public keys. It is based on elliptical curves and mathematical operations, such as adding points and doubling to create a unique signature for each message.
The SCHNORR signatures, introduced by Jürgen Schnorr in 1995, are another popular digital signature scheme that offers a faster verification time compared to the ECDSA. They use a similar approach to the ECDSA, but with some major differences, including the use of a separate Hash feature and a different type of message display.
Why was the Schnorr signing scheme not introduced?
When designing Ethereum’s initial implementation, the choice between ECDSA and Schnorr’s signatures was not easy. Although both schemes had similarities, they had different benefits that made each one consider.
One of the main advantages of the ECDSA was its compatibility with existing cryptographic libraries and tools that were widely used in the industry at the time. In addition, the complexity of the ECDSA and mathematical operations were considered more stable and safer compared to schnorra signatures.
On the other hand, SCHNORR signatures offered faster verification time and reduced computing overheads, making them an attractive choice for certain uses. However, they also introduced some security problems, including vulnerability to their hash function.
Guide: Why was ECDSA Choose
In 2014, the Ethereum developer team faced a decision to make the signature scheme as its standard. After careful consideration and consultation with industry experts, the choice was made to implement the ECDSA, not the signatures of Schnorr.
There are some reasons why ECDSA won for Schnorra’s signatures:
1
Compatibility : As mentioned above, ECDSA compatibility with existing cryptographic libraries and tools made it a more practical choice.
- Security : Although Schnorr’s signatures offered a faster verification time, their security vulnerabilities introduced concerns about the overall security posture of the platform.
3
industry knowledge : Ethereum’s early -stage developers were mainly based on the mathematical environment, which preferred the ECDSA compared to the SCHNORR signatures.
Conclusion
ECDSA’s choice over Schnorr’s signatures was a deliberate decision that reflected both the strengths and weaknesses of each scheme at that time. While Schnorr’s signatures offered a faster verification time, their security vulnerabilities raised concerns about the overall security posture of the platform. In contrast, ECDSA compatibility with existing cryptographic libraries and tools made it a more practical choice.
As Ethereum continues to develop and mature, it is important to maintain a deep understanding of both the ECDSA and the SCHNORR signatures, as well as other cryptographic schemes that make up the blockchain’s ecosystem.