EIP-712 messages as confidential requests #164
Conversation
internal/ethapi/api.go
Outdated
| @@ -1908,6 +1908,50 @@ func (s *TransactionAPI) FillTransaction(ctx context.Context, args TransactionAr | |||
| return &SignTransactionResult{data, tx}, nil | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| func (s *TransactionAPI) SendRawTransaction2(ctx context.Context, eip712Envelope *types.ConfidentialComputeRequest2, input hexutil.Bytes) (common.Hash, error) { | |||
| // Entrypoint for signed eip-712 messages | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
TODO: Verify that the message and the signature match.
core/types/confidential.go
Outdated
| @@ -89,6 +91,97 @@ func (tx *ConfidentialComputeRecord) setSignatureValues(chainID, v, r, s *big.In | |||
| tx.ChainID, tx.V, tx.R, tx.S = chainID, v, r, s | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| type ConfidentialComputeRequest2 struct { | |||
| EIP712 *eip712.EIP712TypedData `json:"eip712"` | |||
| Signature []byte `json:"signature"` | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Signature values in the record are deprecated because you are signing the EIP-712 message, not the record.
core/types/confidential.go
Outdated
| type ConfidentialComputeRequest2 struct { | ||
| EIP712 *eip712.EIP712TypedData `json:"eip712"` | ||
| Signature []byte `json:"signature"` | ||
| Sender common.Address `json:"sender"` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is hacky thing because Geth expects all the signatures in the v, r, s form but in this case is just []byte.
| @@ -89,6 +91,97 @@ func (tx *ConfidentialComputeRecord) setSignatureValues(chainID, v, r, s *big.In | |||
| tx.ChainID, tx.V, tx.R, tx.S = chainID, v, r, s | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| type ConfidentialComputeRequest2 struct { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a transaction type, we could say that is the EIP-712 transaction type. Record is only the message type, like the Suave intent-format.
core/types/transaction_signing.go
Outdated
| ccr = txdata | ||
| case *ConfidentialComputeRequest2: | ||
| // BIG TODO: signature validation, forget about v, r and s, just use the signautre field? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Skip signature check
suave/sdk/sdk.go
Outdated
| Data: calldata, | ||
| ConfidentialInputsHash: crypto.Keccak256Hash(confidentialDataBytes), // ? | ||
|
|
||
| // initialize empty fields |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Initialise them because the EIP-712 library cannot handle nils, but they will go out.
suave/sdk/sdk.go
Outdated
| } | ||
| */ | ||
|
|
||
| domain := &eip712.EIP712Domain{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Feedback on this fields is welcomed.
suave/sdk/sdk.go
Outdated
| domain := &eip712.EIP712Domain{ | ||
| Name: "suave?", | ||
| Version: "1.0", | ||
| VerifyingContract: "0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000", // ?? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is included in the eip712 spec because these signatures are typically validated by a smart contract; the contract would check that msg.verifyingContract == address(this).
Since we're validating signatures offchain, I think this can be ignored and filled with a dummy value
suave/sdk/sdk.go
Outdated
| Name: "suave?", | ||
| Version: "1.0", | ||
| VerifyingContract: "0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000", // ?? | ||
| ChainId: big.NewInt(1), // suave chain id? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, since the primary message is for suave
suave/sdk/sdk.go
Outdated
| ConfidentialInputsHash: crypto.Keccak256Hash(confidentialDataBytes), // ? | ||
|
|
||
| // initialize empty fields | ||
| ChainID: big.NewInt(1337), // suave chain id? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suave/sdk/sdk.go
Outdated
|
|
||
| // initialize empty fields | ||
| ChainID: big.NewInt(1337), // suave chain id? | ||
| V: big.NewInt(0), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do/should we have a version of this struct without v,r,s?
|
good first stab! so the client builds a CCRecord and encodes it into an EIP-712 payload , then signs and sends that to the |
📝 Summary
📚 References