Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 40 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Implement multisig address explorer #25
This change required several steps:
The test also required
N.B. In order to generalize the make_multisig fixture, I set the last signer to be the simulator's actual extended private key as opposed to the one in the constants file. I don't believe this should have any backwards compatibility issues, but I wanted to make a note of it in case tests start breaking.
This change required several steps: - Add methods to create a redeem script and multisig address - Refactor Address Explorer to use injected get_address_at_idx method - Implement multisig address explorer menu - Test for multisig address explorer The test also required - adding a fixture in conftest.py to select the blockchain on the device - refactoring the make_multisig fixture to use multiple chains / addr_fmts
Great changes, thanks.
I've looked more closely now, and here are my concerns:
I am very scared of providing an address the UTXO-watching wallet isn't expecting. With multisig, we might even make an address that we cannot recover funds from, because we need additional signatures from another system that is not as flexible as we are with derivation paths.
Good points. I think they actually speak to a bigger issue I hadn't considered. Since the MultisigWallet only stores up to the
So the open question is what derivations do you want to choose to show in an Address Explorer if any? Allowing the user to explore more derivation paths increases complexity. But reducing this ability or eliminating it entirely prevents users from verifying receive addresses on device.
What do you think?