Compact Signature Representation

The five-minute read

One action, walked through

1. Open ERC 2098 and read the status line before the examples.
2. Write down the rule in one sentence. A fair version of that sentence is: The secp256k1 curve permits the computation of the public key of signed digest when coupled with a signature, which is used implicitly to establish the origin of a transaction from an Externally Owned Account as well as on-chain in EVM contracts for example, in meta-transactions and multi-sig contracts.
3. Name the object that changes: EVM, RLP.
4. Ask what an old client, an old contract, or an offline counterparty does. If the document is silent, the silence is part of the design.

The argument, unpacked

What has to be true

• You are implementing ERC 2098 at the status the text itself states: Final.
• The object that has to change is EVM, RLP. A neighbouring document with a similar name is not this one.
• Constants in the text can be superseded by a later fork. Cite the EIP number and the fork you mean.

What happened after the paper

The source marks this final. That is a statement about the text, not a promise that every wallet or node has shipped it. Later documents can narrow, replace, or ignore this one. Cite the number you mean.

What to check before you use the idea

• What does Compact Signature Representation charge, reject, or redefine on the first touch versus a later one?
• Does a reverted subcall roll the change back?
• Can you point at the object in a client: EVM, RLP?

Terms

ERC 2098

The public text titled Compact Signature Representation.

Final

The document's own label for how finished the text is. It is not a market fact.

The problem the paper names

An underpriced or ambiguous EVM rule is not a feature. It is a block that takes longer than the gas limit claimed, or a client that disagrees about the result.

What the design proposes

• The secp256k1 curve permits the computation of the public key of signed digest when coupled with a signature, which is used implicitly to establish the origin of a transaction from an Externally Owned Account as well as on-chain in EVM contracts for example, in meta-transactions and multi-sig contracts.
• Currently signatures require 65 bytes to represent, which when aligned to 256-bit words, requires 96 bytes (with 31 zero bytes injected).
• The yParity in RLP-encoded transactions also require (on average) 1.5 bytes.

How the mechanism is specified

• Taken from the specification, the next constraint is: Currently signatures require 65 bytes to represent, which when aligned to 256-bit words, requires 96 bytes (with 31 zero bytes injected).
• Locate EVM, RLP in ERC 2098 and apply it to one transaction or call.
• Then check the failure the class of rule always has: a node that did not upgrade, a reverted call, a replayed signature, or a peer that does not speak the message.

What this page does not treat as proven

• A gas or opcode change is not a throughput benchmark. It is a relative price and a validity rule.
• Constants in the text can be superseded by a later fork. Cite the EIP number and the fork you mean.
• The source marks this final. That is a statement about the text, not a promise that every wallet or node has shipped it.

Why a venture studio still reads it

Use ERC 2098 when a pitch says 'Compact Signature Representation' without saying whether the rule is consensus, policy, or an interface. The number is the citation. The pitch is not.