Content
@
https://warpcast.com/~/channel/walletbeat
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
polymutex
@polymutex.eth
gm One of the upcoming attributes for Walletbeat is whether wallets integrate with immutable frontend technology. IPFS and/or ERC-6860 for web apps, or bundled fully-local frontends. Probably more options out there, but need to get off zero. https://x.com/LefterisJP/status/1894785187906789627
1 reply
1 recast
6 reactions
polymutex
@polymutex.eth
What does it mean for a wallet to "integrate IPFS"? It does 𝗻𝗼𝘁 mean "just forward all IPFS traffic to some random IPFS-over-HTTP gateway". All content hashes must be verified locally.
1 reply
0 recast
6 reactions
nuconomy.⌐◨-◨
@nuconomy.eth
This is a tough one. For something like Safe, I’d think Local/IPFS build available. But for something like MetaMask or Rabby what would an IPFS distro even look like? Local build available still covers both cases. Might be better terminology though.
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
polymutex
@polymutex.eth
Great question. It could take multiple forms. Some approaches I can think of: - Offer to redirect well-known IPFS HTTP gateways to the same CID but on alternatives that do client-side verification (and perhaps inject the necessary content/sw scripts to ensure that this is actually the case). - Register the extension as a service worker handling IPFS gateway requests, have it fetch data from IPFS gateways but verify contents before serving it to the browser. Manifest v3 might make this difficult, would need to check. - Offer an option to provide a URL to your own self-hosted Kubo node, similar to how extensions let you choose the RPC endpoint URL for Ethereum RPCs. - Just bundle the latest version of Uniswap's IPFS frontend as static extension files as part of the extension's build process, and inject a content script on the non-IPFS uniswap frontend that asks the user if they would rather visit the extension-bundled version of this frontend. Repeat for other popular dapps.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
v1rtl
@v1rtl.eth
I don't think you can really decentralise the extension code, because it needs some code anyway to pull the assets. Not sure if extensions support SW, if they do, then attaching a service worker to dynamically pull files would work perhaps there could be also an extension registry that serves extension artifacts on IPFS and when downloading it, you could manually verify CIDs
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
