Score:1

Negation of a EC Point with Jacobi x,y,z representation

om flag

I'm building a small library for Schnorr Signatures and the Oracle DLC, the key passage is:

s_i G = R - h(i, R)V

  • R = k G; G generator, k a nonce
  • h(i, R) is the hash of the message i (i is one of the outputs that will be signed by the Oracle)
  • V is the public key of the Oracle (= v G)

The "add" and "multiply" operations use the Jacobi representation for speed, therefore I'd need the negation as well. Negation in the xy representation is (x, -y), what that would be for the xyz?

Also, in my experiments that implementation is indeed faster on the single operations, but I can't find much literature about it, what would be the fastest possible implementation for computing Schnorr signatures?

Thanks, T.

EDIT: wikipedia says -x, but either I read it wrong or it's in another context. If I just slam x,y,z -> x,-y,z everything checks out, I'd like to understand a bit better why though

poncho avatar
my flag
Isn't the negation of $(x,y)$ actually $(x, -y)$?
T. Rossi avatar
om flag
whoops, yes, in the xy representation it is indeed
knaccc avatar
es flag
Ed25519 libraries have something called "double scalar multiplication" which is optimized for verifying a Schnorr signature, and which is particular efficient on that curve.
Score:2
my flag

Negation in the xy representation is (x, -y), would that be the same for the xyz representation?

Well, the Jacobean representation point $(x, y, z)$ corresponds to the regular representation $(xz^{-2}, yz^{-3})$. The negation of that would be $(xz^{-2}, -yz^{-3})$; an easy way to get that in a Jacobean representation would be $(x, -y, z)$.

And so, yes, doing the obvious is the correct way to compute the inverse.

T. Rossi avatar
om flag
thanks! also for the explanation!
mangohost

Post an answer

Most people don’t grasp that asking a lot of questions unlocks learning and improves interpersonal bonding. In Alison’s studies, for example, though people could accurately recall how many questions had been asked in their conversations, they didn’t intuit the link between questions and liking. Across four studies, in which participants were engaged in conversations themselves or read transcripts of others’ conversations, people tended not to realize that question asking would influence—or had influenced—the level of amity between the conversationalists.