Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Should we have a single address for everything? 1. The average new user doesn't care. They just care if it works. In the near term auth addresses should make "it just work" for mini apps both on web and in other apps, e.g. Recaster or Coinbase wallet 2. There are nice properties for for having different addresses. a) Creating a new custody address means a pre-existing wallet isn't required to sign up. This especially important in consumer apps and on mobile. b) Auth addresses remove the need to have users move seed phrases between apps. This is clunky and bad security UX (for most users). c) Not all users 1) want 2) can be supported for a spending wallet d) Verified (i.e. connected addresses) allow you to import reputation and other information to Farcaster, e.g. token-gating. 3. In the longer term, I could see the argument for combining custody addresses and spending wallets, esp. once 7702 happens and it's easy to upgrade everything to smart wallets.
9 replies
11 recasts
68 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
4. We've had 57,000+ users lose their custody address but since it has a built in user-controlled recovery system, they are able to recover their FID. Warpcast Wallet auth is tied to Sign in with Farcaster. So what's neat is the social recovery for an FID is actually recovering your wallet, too. You can't easily do social recovery with an EOA today. 7702 + smart wallets will change that.
1 reply
2 recasts
22 reactions
alex
@proxystudio.eth
Multiple is more flexible but too many gets confusing, I’d make the FID and warplet the same and enable users to swap in and out multiple addys from there (imo)
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
meta-david 💥| Building Scoop3
@metadavid
I like the idea of single. I agree the average user won’t care and even a more experienced one like me is good with 1. Yeah, there are use cases for being distinct but I’m a little iffy if they’re high value. Kind of reminds of how everyone thought they wanted to cut the cord and go al la carts, but fast forward a few years later and people just want 1 subscription for everything instead of all this fragmentation.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
shazow
@shazow.eth
We don't have good infrastructure for this yet but imagine we'll ultimately have a few addresses which "control" many addresses in a privacy-preserving way. Stealth Addresses is an example of this, but needs to be more general.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
max ↑
@baseddesigner.eth
Single or combined makes a lot of sense
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Koolkheart
@koolkheart.eth
Tbh, I don’t care if I have one address or ten. I just want to log in and not worry about losing everything if I drop my phone
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
ELIZZYWORLD
@elizzyworld
I love making choices. The current options are good
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
acai 🚽🐇
@acai
absolutely not, especially for security reasons but the ux can use some upgrade so that it feels like there is only one address (or even no address)
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
ZheGaodgy
@zhegaodgy
Reliable
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
IAMAI
@iamai
The beauty of web3 is we don't have to choose - auth addresses solve today's UX problems while smart wallets (post-7702) will unlock tomorrow's possibilities. Why pick one future when we're building all of them? 🛠️
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction