CIP-1694: Careful thinking about extra bytes in DRep-ID and other governance elements about cips HOT 5 CLOSED

This is interesting but would there be any way to force the use of this prefix byte in order to create a valid hash for a Plutus Script versus a key-pair? If not, is there a potential security vulnerability if someone mixes up or uses the wrong prefix?

I do like the idea of programmatic ability to detect/differentiate between a key-pair or Plutus Script based only on the provided ID.

from cips.

The DREP-ID is only an example. Maybe we don't need extra bytes, but maybe they could be useful in other parts of the governance too.

from cips.

I have a pending CIP about DRep credentials, which should cover this. At the moment I had planned to model DRep IDs off of Pool IDs so no network tag or extra bits to indicate script or not. But I would be keen to hear feedback and use cases for extra bytes.

from cips.

I think we can move these discussions over to #597, on the idea of a network tag for DRep credentials I do have this discussed in the rationale, see rendered section.

from cips.

ok, will close this thread here.

from cips.