Skip to main content

Elliptic Curve Comparison: secp256k1 vs P-256

Comprehensive comparison of the two ECDSA curves supported by Voltaire.

Overview Table

FeatureSecp256k1P-256 (secp256r1)
Full Namesecp256k1NIST P-256 / secp256r1 / prime256v1
StandardizationSECG SEC 2NIST FIPS 186-4, SECG SEC 2
Security Level128-bit128-bit
Curve Equationy² = x³ + 7y² = x³ - 3x + b
Field Prime (p)2²⁵⁶ - 2³² - 9772²⁵⁶ - 2²²⁴ + 2¹⁹² + 2⁹⁶ - 1
Ethereum Core✅ Required❌ Not used (L2 only)
Bitcoin✅ Yes❌ No
WebAuthn/FIDO2❌ Not supported✅ Default curve
iOS Secure Enclave❌ Not supported✅ Only supported curve
Android Keystore❌ Limited✅ Full support
TLS 1.3❌ Rare✅ Default
Hardware Wallets✅ Universal⚠️ Some (YubiKey, TPM)
Recovery ID✅ Yes (v parameter)❌ No (not needed)
Signature Size65 bytes (r,s,v)64 bytes (r,s)

When to Use Each Curve

Use Secp256k1 When:

Ethereum transactions - Required for EOA (Externally Owned Account) ✅ Bitcoin compatibility - Cross-chain applications ✅ ecRecover - On-chain signature verification (EVM precompile) ✅ Traditional crypto wallets - Ledger, Trezor, MetaMask ✅ Public key recovery needed - Derive address from signature without storing pubkey

Use P-256 When:

WebAuthn/Passkeys - Passwordless authentication (Face ID, Touch ID, Windows Hello) ✅ iOS Secure Enclave - Hardware-backed keys on Apple devices ✅ Enterprise PKI - Government and corporate compliance (FIPS) ✅ Smart cards - PIV, CAC, YubiKey ✅ Account abstraction - Smart contract wallets with hardware authentication (RIP-7212) ✅ TLS/HTTPS - Modern web security

Technical Differences

Curve Equations

Secp256k1:
y² = x³ + 7 (mod p)

Coefficients: a = 0, b = 7
Simple Weierstrass form with b = 7. The a = 0 coefficient provides computational efficiency. P-256:
y² = x³ - 3x + b (mod p)

Coefficients: a = -3, b = 0x5AC635D8AA3A93E7B3EBBD55769886BC651D06B0CC53B0F63BCE3C3E27D2604B
Standard Weierstrass form with a = -3, providing different performance characteristics.

Field Primes

Secp256k1:
p = 2²⁵⁶ - 2³² - 977
  = 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEFFFFFC2F
  • Form: Pseudo-Mersenne prime (near 2²⁵⁶)
  • Optimization: Fast modular reduction (subtract small constant)
P-256:
p = 2²⁵⁶ - 2²²⁴ + 2¹⁹² + 2⁹⁶ - 1
  = 0xFFFFFFFF00000001000000000000000000000000FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
  • Form: NIST prime (specific structure)
  • Optimization: Specialized reduction algorithm

Curve Orders

Secp256k1:
n = 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEBAAEDCE6AF48A03BBFD25E8CD0364141
P-256:
n = 0xFFFFFFFF00000000FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFBCE6FAADA7179E84F3B9CAC2FC632551
Both approximately 2²⁵⁶, providing 128-bit security.

Performance Comparison

TypeScript (@noble/curves)

Measured on MacBook Pro M1, Node.js v20:
OperationSecp256k1P-256Winner
Public key derivation0.50ms0.55msSecp256k1 (10% faster)
Signing1.25ms1.30msSecp256k1 (4% faster)
Verification2.50ms2.60msSecp256k1 (4% faster)
ECDHN/A1.20msP-256 only
Conclusion: Similar performance, secp256k1 slightly faster due to simpler curve equation (a = 0).

Native (C libraries)

Operationlibsecp256k1OpenSSL P-256Winner
Signing0.50ms0.60msSecp256k1 (20% faster)
Verification1.00ms1.10msSecp256k1 (10% faster)

Hardware Acceleration

PlatformSecp256k1P-256
Intel CPU❌ No acceleration❌ No acceleration
ARM Crypto Extensions❌ No❌ No
iOS Secure Enclave❌ Not supported✅ Hardware-accelerated
Android Keystore❌ Limited✅ Hardware-accelerated
TPM 2.0❌ Rare✅ Standard
YubiKey❌ No✅ Yes
Winner: P-256 for hardware support, secp256k1 for software performance.

Security Comparison

Trust Model

Secp256k1:
  • Origin: SECG (Standards for Efficient Cryptography Group)
  • Selection: Parameters verifiably random (“nothing up my sleeve”)
  • Transparency: Clear justification for all constants
  • Community trust: High (Bitcoin, Ethereum adoption)
P-256:
  • Origin: NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology)
  • Selection: Generated using SHA-1 hash of seed value
  • Transparency: Some skepticism about NIST curve selection process
  • Government trust: Required for US federal systems (FIPS)
Controversy: Some cryptographers prefer non-NIST curves (like Curve25519) due to transparency concerns, but no known backdoors in P-256.

Known Vulnerabilities

Both curves:
  • ✅ No known mathematical weaknesses
  • ✅ No known backdoors
  • ✅ No feasible discrete log attacks
  • ✅ Side-channel resistance (if implemented correctly)
Implementation risks:
  • ⚠️ Nonce reuse leaks private key (both)
  • ⚠️ Timing attacks possible (both, if not constant-time)
  • ⚠️ Invalid curve attacks (both, must validate points)

Audit Status

Secp256k1:
  • libsecp256k1 - Multiple audits, Bitcoin Core
  • @noble/curves - Security audited, production-ready
  • Widely used: Bitcoin, Ethereum, thousands of projects
P-256:
  • OpenSSL - Extensively audited, ubiquitous
  • @noble/curves - Same library as secp256k1 (audited)
  • Widely used: TLS, WebAuthn, enterprise PKI
Winner: Tie - both have well-audited implementations.

Ecosystem Support

Blockchain

BlockchainSecp256k1P-256
Ethereum mainnet✅ Required❌ No (RIP-7212 pending)
Bitcoin✅ Required❌ No
Polygon✅ Yes⚠️ Precompile proposed
StarkNet✅ Yes⚠️ Optional (AA)
zkSync✅ Yes⚠️ Account abstraction
Optimism✅ Yes⚠️ Roadmap

Web/Mobile

PlatformSecp256k1P-256
Browser WebCrypto❌ Not standard✅ Yes
WebAuthn❌ Not supported✅ Default
iOS Keychain❌ No✅ Yes
Android Keystore❌ Limited✅ Full support
Windows Hello❌ No✅ Yes

Libraries

LibrarySecp256k1P-256
@noble/curves✅ Yes✅ Yes
ethers.js✅ Yes❌ No
viem✅ Yes❌ No
Web3.js✅ Yes❌ No
OpenSSL✅ Yes✅ Yes
BouncyCastle✅ Yes✅ Yes

Use Case Examples

Ethereum Transaction Signing (Secp256k1)

import * as Secp256k1 from '@tevm/voltaire/Secp256k1';
import * as Transaction from '@tevm/voltaire/Transaction';

// Sign transaction with secp256k1 (required)
const tx = {
  to: '0x...',
  value: 1000000000000000000n,
  // ...
};

const txHash = Transaction.hash(tx);
const signature = Secp256k1.sign(txHash, privateKey);

// Recover sender address (ecRecover)
const publicKey = Secp256k1.recoverPublicKey(signature, txHash);
const senderAddress = Address.fromPublicKey(publicKey);
Why secp256k1? Ethereum requires it. No alternative.

WebAuthn Authentication (P-256)

import * as P256 from '@tevm/voltaire/P256';
import { Bytes32 } from '@tevm/voltaire/Bytes32';

// User authenticates with Face ID/Touch ID
const credential = await navigator.credentials.create({
  publicKey: {
    challenge: Bytes32('0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001'),
    rp: { name: 'My DApp' },
    user: { id: userId, name: '[email protected]', displayName: 'Alice' },
    pubKeyCredParams: [{ alg: -7, type: 'public-key' }], // ES256 (P-256)
    authenticatorSelection: { userVerification: 'required' },
  },
});

// Extract P-256 public key from credential
const publicKey = extractP256Key(credential);

// Verify WebAuthn signature
const isValid = P256.verify(signature, messageHash, publicKey);
Why P-256? WebAuthn only supports P-256 (and EdDSA). Secure Enclave requires P-256.

Account Abstraction (Both)

Traditional EOA (secp256k1):
// Validate signature with ecrecover
address signer = ecrecover(messageHash, v, r, s);
require(signer == owner, "Invalid signature");
Smart Wallet with Passkey (P-256, requires RIP-7212):
// Validate P-256 signature (proposed precompile at 0x100)
bool valid = verifyP256(messageHash, r, s, publicKey.x, publicKey.y);
require(valid, "Invalid passkey signature");
Why both? Legacy EOAs use secp256k1, modern smart wallets can use P-256 for UX.

Migration Considerations

From Secp256k1 to P-256

Challenges:
  • ❌ Different curves (not compatible)
  • ❌ Requires smart contract wallet (EOAs are secp256k1 only)
  • ❌ Limited L1 support (RIP-7212 not yet deployed)
Opportunities:
  • ✅ Hardware wallet support (YubiKey, Secure Enclave)
  • ✅ Passwordless authentication (WebAuthn)
  • ✅ Enterprise compliance (FIPS)

Hybrid Approach

Account abstraction with multiple signers:
contract MultiSigWallet {
  address public secp256k1Owner;  // Traditional
  P256PublicKey public p256Owner;  // Passkey

  function execute(bytes calldata data, bytes calldata signature, SignatureType sigType)
    external
  {
    if (sigType == SignatureType.Secp256k1) {
      // Validate secp256k1 (ecrecover)
      require(validateSecp256k1(data, signature, secp256k1Owner));
    } else if (sigType == SignatureType.P256) {
      // Validate P-256 (RIP-7212 precompile)
      require(validateP256(data, signature, p256Owner));
    }

    // Execute transaction
    (bool success, ) = target.call(data);
    require(success);
  }
}
Benefits:
  • Secp256k1 for compatibility
  • P-256 for UX (Face ID, Touch ID)
  • Graceful degradation

Recommendations

For Ethereum DApps

Transaction signing:
  • ✅ Use secp256k1 (required for EOAs)
  • ⚠️ Consider P-256 for smart contract wallets (future)
Off-chain authentication:
  • ✅ secp256k1 for wallet compatibility (EIP-191, EIP-712)
  • ✅ P-256 for WebAuthn/passkeys (better UX)

For Enterprise Applications

Government/regulated:
  • ✅ Use P-256 (FIPS compliance required)
  • ❌ Avoid secp256k1 (not FIPS-approved)
Public blockchain:
  • ✅ Use secp256k1 (universal support)

For Mobile/Web Apps

iOS app:
  • ✅ Use P-256 (Secure Enclave)
  • ⚠️ secp256k1 for Ethereum compatibility
Web app:
  • ✅ Use P-256 (WebAuthn, WebCrypto API)
  • ✅ secp256k1 for Web3 wallet integration
Progressive approach:
  1. Secp256k1 for blockchain operations
  2. P-256 for user authentication
  3. Bridge the two via smart contract wallet

Future Outlook

RIP-7212: P-256 Precompile

Status: Proposed for Ethereum L1 Precompile address: 0x100 Impact:
  • ✅ On-chain P-256 verification (3000 gas)
  • ✅ Enables passkey-based smart wallets
  • ✅ Hardware wallet integration (YubiKey)
Timeline: Likely inclusion in future hard fork

Account Abstraction (EIP-4337)

Trend: Move toward smart contract wallets Implication:
  • Signature scheme flexibility
  • Support for multiple curves (secp256k1 + P-256)
  • Hardware-based authentication

Post-Quantum Cryptography

Both curves vulnerable to quantum computers:
  • Shor’s algorithm breaks ECDLP
  • Estimated 10-20 years until threat
Future migration:
  • NIST post-quantum standards (CRYSTALS, etc.)
  • Hybrid classical + post-quantum schemes

Conclusion

CriterionWinner
Ethereum compatibilitySecp256k1
Hardware wallet supportP-256
Software performanceSecp256k1 (slight)
Hardware accelerationP-256
StandardizationP-256 (NIST/FIPS)
Ecosystem maturityTie (both widely used)
SecurityTie (both 128-bit secure)
Future-proofingP-256 (broader adoption)
Recommendation:
  • Ethereum-native apps: Secp256k1 (required)
  • Modern web/mobile: P-256 (better UX)
  • Enterprise: P-256 (compliance)
  • Hybrid/AA: Both (best of both worlds)