lightclient

@lightclient

11 Following

454 Followers

0age pfp

Nothing beats when the EVM enters a new “weird era” First: introduction of DELEGATECALL to replace CALLCODE Then: CREATE2 (this was a huge game-changer & really kicked off my personal journey in understanding yhe EVM) Now: AUTH & AUTHCALL — so much to be (re)built and reconsidered And just wait until EOF 🤯

3 replies

1 recast

25 reactions

lightclient pfp

Have you concocted the most insane way AUTH/AUTHCALL could be used yet? I recall HomeWork!

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

lightclient pfp

Okay @daws officially farcaster pilled me.

2 replies

0 recast

5 reactions

lightclient pfp

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

lightclient pfp

An invoker should only require one 3074 AUTH msg to initiate the delegation, then with a different key you can make more regular signatures over tx batches and the like.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

lightclient pfp

I made my first cast! Hello world!

3 replies

1 recast

15 reactions

lightclient pfp

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

lightclient pfp

Our DMs are open! Please reach out if we can help.

2 replies

0 recast

6 reactions

lightclient pfp

Over the last several years, we've spent a lot of time developing hypothetical scenarios on how it might be used and abuse. We're excited for these ideas to begin being productionized. But we're also cognizant that this is the hard part.

1 reply

0 recast

6 reactions

lightclient pfp

It is possible to integrate and use 3074 safely. If any wallets have questions on how they can do this, please don't hesitate to reach out. As authors of 3074, we're currently figuring how we can best help this standard in its next phase of life.

1 reply

1 recast

6 reactions

lightclient pfp

Yes, 3074 is putting a lot of trust into wallets. But look, we are already trusting them with securely our private key! There isn't a higher level of trust.

1 reply

0 recast

8 reactions

lightclient pfp

Wallets must clearly display each op you're signing over. This way, it is easy to notice "I was only planning to make a single trade, but this signing request is having me do a dozen transfers also". It will be impossible to detect this if batching available via blind signing.

1 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

lightclient pfp

Assuming a wallet securely integrates 3074, it is still possible for an account to be swept. This is a fundamental property of batch txs. It as easily allows you to send multiple ops as it allows an attacker to trick you to send a batch of assets to an address they control.

1 reply

1 recast

4 reactions

lightclient pfp

At minimum, wallets should make signing a 3074 message a big deal. This is like exporting-your-private-key level of big deal.

2 replies

1 recast

7 reactions

lightclient pfp

So if wallets insecurely integrate 3074 *and* users do not verify the invoker they're interacting with, it is possible to delegate to a malicious invoker. However, it is possible to undo by sending a single tx from the EOA. This revokes all "in-flight" AUTH signatures.

2 replies

0 recast

5 reactions

lightclient pfp

For 1) we hope wallets understand that 3074 invokers are more akin to extensions of their code than they are contracts. Wallets don't give users the freedom to run arbitrary code with access to their pk; similarly, they shouldn't allow users to delegate their account arbitrarily.

1 reply

0 recast

5 reactions

lightclient pfp

For an account to be drained 1) the wallet will need to allow users to sign to any invoker address and 2) the users must not verify the invoker is trustworthy. Do either of those and there is not an issue.

1 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

lightclient pfp

The auth msg which the signature is constructed over have the below fields. Importantly, it includes an invoker address. This is the only address under which the signature will be considered valid by AUTH.

1 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

lightclient pfp

Depending on how wallets integrate 3074, they could create a situation where their users can more easily be exploited. To understand this, we need to make sure we understand how 3074 signatures work.

1 reply

0 recast

5 reactions

lightclient pfp

3074 plans to use the prefix 0x04. This will disambiguate it from all other types of signable data in Ethereum. Wallets will have to actively opt-in to allowing users to sign these messages.

1 reply

1 recast

7 reactions