Farcaster

Reviving the "primary address verification" FIP.

When we wrote this a year ago, it seemed like a good idea to allow only EOAs as primary, since SCWs may not be deployed everywhere. Now I am much less sure since most modern smart accounts have crosschain counterfactual addresses.

Should we leave this up to the user, who can verify smart contract addresses at their own risk?

Reviving the "primary address verification" FIP.

When we wrote this a year ago, it seemed like a good idea to allow only EOAs as primary, since SCWs may not be deployed everywhere. Now I am much less sure since most modern smart accounts have crosschain counterfactual addresses.

Should we leave this up to the user, who can verify smart contract addresses at their own risk?

https://github.com/farcasterxyz/protocol/discussions/141

I'm eth newbie..just learning
(working on @farcaster)

terminally.online

I've personally experienced the downside of having a SCW connected - my zksync airdrop went to my safe (counterfactual deploy not possible) and it was a HUGE pain to recover it.

I would have been more gung ho on letting users choose in the past, but given the potential downsides and (guessing) limited number of people using SCWs as their primary I feel like it's not worth it