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

My spiciest of takes is that 4337 SCWs are not here to stay in their current form, and the DX of “on the client to check” is not going to be checked in practice, so not worth

building privy.io, always in pursuit of ice cream, love /urbanism

...so we should disallow verification of SCWS? 🌶️