CEP-3009: Transfer with Authorization#100
Conversation
zie1ony
changed the title
| from Ethereum and is adapted to Casper's native multi-scheme signatures | ||
| (ed25519, secp256k1). A token holder signs a typed message authorizing a | ||
| specific transfer (recipient, amount, validity window, unique nonce), and | ||
| any party may submit that signature to execute the transfer on the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is true for transfer_with_authorization. Not for receive_with_authorization.
| - three new mutating entry points (`transfer_with_authorization`, | ||
| `receive_with_authorization`, `cancel_authorization`), | ||
| - one read entry point (`authorization_state`), | ||
| - the EIP-712 typed data definitions for the three structs above, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
'...and the domain separator'
| Below definitions use Rust syntax, but they are not Rust specific. `Bytes` | ||
| denotes the Casper `bytesrepr::Bytes` type; nonces are exactly 32 bytes. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Entrypoint interface |
| /// | ||
| /// The signature is verified against the `ReceiveWithAuthorization` | ||
| /// typed payload — a distinct typehash from | ||
| /// `transfer_with_authorization`, so a signature for one cannot be |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
TransferWithAuthorization the type, not the entry point.
| - `valid_before` encoded as a `u64` left-padded to 32 bytes, | ||
| - `nonce` as a 32-byte value (right-padded with zeros if shorter). | ||
|
|
||
| Note: `validAfter` and `validBefore` appear as `uint256` in the type |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this note needed? If uint256 is equivalent, should we keep it simple and just write “validAfter encoded as a uint256“ above?
|
|
||
| Encoded message data: | ||
|
|
||
| - `authorizer` encoded as EIP-712 `address` (32 bytes, big-endian, left-padded), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same comment as for from and to in TransferWithAuthorization.
| InvalidCaller = 37_005, | ||
| /// The `(authorizer, nonce)` pair targeted by `cancel_authorization` | ||
| /// is already used or canceled. | ||
| AuthorizationUsed = 37_006, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider using this error in transfer_with_authorization and receive_with_authorization and remove NonceAlreadyUsed.
| The chain name used in the EIP-712 domain separator is stored in the | ||
| contract's named keys: | ||
|
|
||
| - The chain name is stored under the key `chain_name` with the type |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Recommend to use CAIP-2 chain ids (e.g.: casper:casper, casper:casper-test, or casper:casper-net-1).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not "recommend". Definitely use CAIP-2 chain ids...
3 participants
rendered