EIP-712: Sign typed data #4803

bitpshr · 2018-07-15T06:32:08Z

This pull request implements necessary changes to fully support the current version of EIP-712 in both the old and new user interfaces. Note that most of the heavy-lifting of this implementation is handled by the updated signTypedData function in eth-sig-util.

Note: For now, we're displaying domain data as an inspectable object just like actual message data. Eventually, we should probably render this domain data differently (notice the mocked up "Domain / URL / Contract" section here, cc @cjeria.)

Resolves #4752
References ethereum/EIPs/pull/1222

Todo:

Update signTypedData and recoverTypedSignature
Bump eth-sig-util in eth-simple-keyring
Bump eth-sig-util in eth-hd-keyring
Bump both keyrings in eth-keyring-controller
Bump eth-keyring-controller in the extension
Update old UI to display data
Update new UI to display data
Ensure a non-breaking path for dapps using the old signTypedData method.

jennypollack · 2018-07-17T14:54:03Z

app/scripts/lib/typed-message-manager.js

@@ -221,7 +238,7 @@ module.exports = class TypedMessageManager extends EventEmitter {
    msg.status = status
    this._updateMsg(msg)
    this.emit(`${msgId}:${status}`, msg)
-    if (status === 'rejected' || status === 'signed') {
+    if (status === 'rejected' || status === 'signed' || status === 'errored') {


unclear when status gets set to 'errored' due to errors thrown in validateParams

I'm not sure I follow; what's unclear? The conditions that cause a message to be considered invalid? Error descriptions should be fine; are you suggesting to improve the documentation for the validateParams method to explicitly state what conditions are validated?

Ah sorry I was being dense, I didn't see the call to set the message status in metamask-controller

danfinlay · 2018-07-18T23:09:39Z

Does this PR enforce the validity of the domain field? I think enforcing the domain.url at least is a basic security feature we should include here. I believe that's part of the spec?

leroldary · 2018-07-19T12:27:16Z

@danfinlay The spec doesn't mention a domain.url field. See https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/blob/master/EIPS/eip-712.md#definition-of-domainseparator.
It only explicitly mentions the verification of the chainId. Not sure if it's done in this PR.

danfinlay · 2018-07-19T17:56:39Z

Thanks for the links (was posting from phone earlier, doing bad research). I don't think we're enforcing that chainId parameter yet, would be a good improvement to make.

bitpshr · 2018-07-19T18:41:58Z

Thanks @danfinlay and @leroldary, great catch with the domain.chainId enforcement. I updated the pull request accordingly. I also confirmed with the EIP author that the domain separator isn't meant to validate the name field beyond schema validation.

MrChico · 2018-07-25T15:36:27Z

Hey, where can I find the tests associated with this functionality? Do they also include the smart contract verification of typed signatures?

ipatka · 2018-07-25T17:11:11Z

@MrChico Check out Example.js and Example.sol in the EIP712 repo
https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/tree/master/assets/eip-712

bitpshr · 2018-07-25T17:18:46Z

@ipatka is correct, the EIP itself has example resources, and our implementation based on these resources lives in eth-sig-util. Also note that the EIP's example code intentionally (and temporarily) omitted array encoding, so we submitted an upstream PR with this functionality at ethereum/EIPs#1242 @MrChico.

danfinlay

Ideally we render the domain info as more of a table, but that's no blocker. Let's get this out there!

Oh, also: Needs a changelog entry!!!

cjeria · 2018-07-26T18:37:46Z

test failing but we want to merge!

metamaskbot · 2018-07-27T12:43:31Z

Builds ready [e45fa27]: mascara, chrome, firefox, edge, opera

ipatka · 2018-07-27T17:51:11Z

Is it possible to detect which Metamask version is installed and if this feature is available?

whymarrh · 2018-07-27T17:54:21Z

@ipatka this PR hasn't been merged into the application just yet

ipatka · 2018-07-27T17:55:46Z

@whymarrh right, is there a way to detect the version once it is merged?

ipatka · 2018-07-27T18:00:50Z

Also, will this break apps that use the previous implementation of EIP712 or will it support both?

bitpshr · 2018-07-27T19:33:03Z

Hi @ipatka. We plan to add a deprecation warning to the current implementation of eth_signTypedData (#4905) and ultimately replace it with the new implementation when this PR lands. We don't plan to concurrently support both versions since the prior version is both experimental and no longer adherent to any specification.

@danfinlay @cjeria CI all green again, but I think we should only land this after #4905 lands and the next release is cut. As soon as that's done, this can hit develop (and go out with the next release thereafter.)

bitpshr · 2018-09-03T14:42:42Z

Hi @sullof: thanks for reaching out. We plan to do exactly what you suggested: we will release support for the new method under the correct RPC method name, but we will also concurrently support the old method under a modified RPC method name. This means that any app that was using the old version of the method will continue to work as long as they update to use the deprecated method name. This is what @danfinlay was referring to when he mentioned breaking APIs responsibly. We also plan to release a blog post that details this information, including exact release dates, in the coming weeks.

Apologies for the lack of clarity around this rollout process. Please let us know if you have any additional questions or concerns.

sullof · 2018-09-04T09:32:51Z

@bitpshr That is very helpful. Thanks so much.

bitpshr · 2018-09-10T21:42:08Z

This pull request has been rebased and updated to concurrently support both the old and new versions of EIP-712. To provide dapps with the smoothest transition possible, each version of this proposal is and will be uniquely name-spaced. For example, the original version will be available at eth_signTypedData_v1, the current version will be available at eth_signTypedData_v2, and if EIP-712 were to change again, that new version would be available at eth_signTypedData_v3, and so on.

Note: For now, the canonical RPC method eth_signTypedData still points to the original version of EIP-712, not the new version. This gives dapps sufficient time to test and develop against the new version at eth_signTypedData_v2 while not breaking dapps using the old version. We should blog about support of this new version, and also include a specific date when eth_signTypedData will point to this new version.

cc @danfinlay @bdresser

metamaskbot · 2018-09-10T21:44:50Z

Builds ready [edb7bba]: mascara, chrome, firefox, edge, opera

bitpshr · 2018-09-10T22:11:06Z

app/scripts/lib/typed-message-manager.js

-    assert.doesNotThrow(() => {
-      sigUtil.typedSignatureHash(params.data)
-    }, 'Expected EIP712 typed data')
+    switch (params.version) {


For now, since there are only two versions of the proposal, we include both validation logic paths in the same TypedMessageManager class. If there ends up being even more iterations of the proposal with different validation schemes (unlikely, but possible), we can break this class down into a base Manager class and multiple implementations that extend it with a custom validateParams method.

bitpshr · 2018-09-10T22:15:50Z

app/scripts/metamask-controller.js

-        return this.getState()
-      })
+    const version = msgParams.version
+    try {


Previously, we called down into the KeyringController, which in turn called into a specific keyring, which then called called signTypedData. This dependency depth made changes very difficult and it seemed like potentially-unnecessary indirection. To get around this, the MetaMaskController just does the signing directly without traversing down to a specific keyring. This also lends itself well to a future of signature-specific controllers at the extension level.

bitpshr · 2018-09-10T22:18:06Z

app/scripts/metamask-controller.js

@@ -1253,6 +1263,9 @@ module.exports = class MetamaskController extends EventEmitter {
    engine.push(createLoggerMiddleware({ origin }))
    engine.push(filterMiddleware)
    engine.push(this.preferencesController.requestWatchAsset.bind(this.preferencesController))
+    engine.push(this.createTypedDataMiddleware('eth_signTypedData', 'V1').bind(this))
+    engine.push(this.createTypedDataMiddleware('eth_signTypedData_v1', 'V1').bind(this))
+    engine.push(this.createTypedDataMiddleware('eth_signTypedData_v2', 'V2').bind(this))


Instead of using processTypedMessage when initializing the web3-provider-engine, we use custom middleware to intercept eth_signTypedData methods. This allows us to have fine-grained control over custom and non-custom RPC methods without touching the provider engine itself.

Note that for now, eth_signTypedData is still pointing to V1 of the EIP-712 proposal.

I told Pete Kim of Cipher that his implementation could be v2, and so the final one (this one) would be v3. Mind if we change to that? I think that will be a nice gesture to them, and leaves us open to backwards-support any apps using their version.

metamaskbot · 2018-09-11T13:49:33Z

Builds ready [b5fef2a]: mascara, chrome, firefox, edge, opera

danfinlay · 2018-09-12T05:50:59Z

app/scripts/metamask-controller.js

@@ -1253,6 +1263,9 @@ module.exports = class MetamaskController extends EventEmitter {
    engine.push(createLoggerMiddleware({ origin }))
    engine.push(filterMiddleware)
    engine.push(this.preferencesController.requestWatchAsset.bind(this.preferencesController))
+    engine.push(this.createTypedDataMiddleware('eth_signTypedData', 'V1').bind(this))
+    engine.push(this.createTypedDataMiddleware('eth_signTypedData_v1', 'V1').bind(this))
+    engine.push(this.createTypedDataMiddleware('eth_signTypedData_v2', 'V2').bind(this))


I told Pete Kim of Cipher that his implementation could be v2, and so the final one (this one) would be v3. Mind if we change to that? I think that will be a nice gesture to them, and leaves us open to backwards-support any apps using their version.

Addressed.

danfinlay

This looks great, and non breaking! Can't wait to get this in the hands of developers!

metamaskbot · 2018-09-13T20:03:40Z

Builds ready [42fdcf6]: mascara, chrome, firefox, edge, opera

loriopatrick · 2018-10-15T18:42:09Z

What's the status of this feature with the recent rollbacks? Release v4.14.0 does not seem to support it. We're currently using release v4.10.0 with success but would like to get our application in the hands others. It's hard to get people to manually setup an older version of MetaMask for a variety of reasons. Thanks.

loriopatrick · 2018-10-17T17:48:35Z

^ Resolved. Support added back in v4.14.0 however the parameters where swapped. It is now [signer, typedData].

bitpshr requested review from danfinlay, kumavis and danjm July 15, 2018 06:32

jennypollack reviewed Jul 17, 2018

View reviewed changes

danfinlay mentioned this pull request Jul 19, 2018

MetaMask does not show signature request if open when 'eth_signTypedData' request is sent #4821

Closed

bitpshr force-pushed the eip-712 branch from fa8c5fc to 20abbe0 Compare July 19, 2018 19:05

bdresser mentioned this pull request Jul 23, 2018

Add logging for signing methods #4850

Closed

danfinlay previously approved these changes Jul 25, 2018

View reviewed changes

bitpshr dismissed danfinlay’s stale review via 4fae136 July 27, 2018 12:22

bitpshr force-pushed the eip-712 branch from 20abbe0 to 4fae136 Compare July 27, 2018 12:22

bitpshr requested review from alextsg and whymarrh as code owners July 27, 2018 12:22

Platinumwrist previously approved these changes Jul 27, 2018

View reviewed changes

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

leroldary mentioned this pull request Jul 31, 2018

Support current merged EIP-712 specification trustwallet/trust-wallet-ios#825

Closed

bitpshr dismissed Platinumwrist’s stale review via f16a372 July 31, 2018 16:18

bitpshr added the DO-NOT-MERGE Pull requests that should not be merged label Sep 3, 2018

bitpshr mentioned this pull request Sep 4, 2018

Support current merged EIP-712 specification #4752

Closed

bitpshr force-pushed the eip-712 branch from f16a372 to edb7bba Compare September 10, 2018 21:12

bitpshr mentioned this pull request Sep 10, 2018

EIP-712: Array support MetaMask/eth-sig-util#22

Closed

bitpshr commented Sep 10, 2018

View reviewed changes

danfinlay previously requested changes Sep 12, 2018

View reviewed changes

danfinlay previously approved these changes Sep 13, 2018

View reviewed changes

bitpshr added 3 commits September 13, 2018 15:40

Implement latest EIP-712 protocol

36dd035

Update error message for chainId mis-match

68c2554

Update new method namespace from v2 to v3

42fdcf6

bitpshr dismissed danfinlay’s stale review via 42fdcf6 September 13, 2018 19:46

bitpshr force-pushed the eip-712 branch from d87f92a to 42fdcf6 Compare September 13, 2018 19:46

danfinlay previously approved these changes Sep 13, 2018

View reviewed changes

dternyak mentioned this pull request Sep 17, 2018

Recover Signed Messages rmeissner/py-eth-sig-utils#2

Closed

Merge branch 'develop' into eip-712

daca7f9

bitpshr dismissed danfinlay’s stale review via daca7f9 September 17, 2018 16:11

danfinlay approved these changes Sep 17, 2018

View reviewed changes

danfinlay merged commit 934b103 into develop Sep 17, 2018

tmashuang mentioned this pull request Sep 17, 2018

Version 4.10.0 #5281

Merged

qcdll mentioned this pull request Sep 25, 2018

fully integrate EIP-712 QuarkChain/pyquarkchain#117

Open

whymarrh deleted the eip-712 branch November 19, 2019 15:00

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

EIP-712: Sign typed data #4803

EIP-712: Sign typed data #4803

bitpshr commented Jul 15, 2018 •

edited

Loading

jennypollack Jul 17, 2018

bitpshr Jul 17, 2018

jennypollack Jul 17, 2018

danfinlay commented Jul 18, 2018

leroldary commented Jul 19, 2018

danfinlay commented Jul 19, 2018

bitpshr commented Jul 19, 2018

MrChico commented Jul 25, 2018

ipatka commented Jul 25, 2018

bitpshr commented Jul 25, 2018 •

edited

Loading

danfinlay left a comment

cjeria commented Jul 26, 2018

metamaskbot commented Jul 27, 2018

ipatka commented Jul 27, 2018

whymarrh commented Jul 27, 2018

ipatka commented Jul 27, 2018

ipatka commented Jul 27, 2018

bitpshr commented Jul 27, 2018 •

edited

Loading

This comment has been minimized.

bitpshr commented Sep 3, 2018 •

edited

Loading

sullof commented Sep 4, 2018

bitpshr commented Sep 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

metamaskbot commented Sep 10, 2018

bitpshr Sep 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

bitpshr Sep 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

bitpshr Sep 10, 2018

danfinlay Sep 12, 2018

metamaskbot commented Sep 11, 2018

danfinlay Sep 12, 2018

danfinlay left a comment

metamaskbot commented Sep 13, 2018

loriopatrick commented Oct 15, 2018

loriopatrick commented Oct 17, 2018

EIP-712: Sign typed data #4803

EIP-712: Sign typed data #4803

Conversation

bitpshr commented Jul 15, 2018 • edited Loading

jennypollack Jul 17, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bitpshr Jul 17, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jennypollack Jul 17, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

danfinlay commented Jul 18, 2018

leroldary commented Jul 19, 2018

danfinlay commented Jul 19, 2018

bitpshr commented Jul 19, 2018

MrChico commented Jul 25, 2018

ipatka commented Jul 25, 2018

bitpshr commented Jul 25, 2018 • edited Loading

danfinlay left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cjeria commented Jul 26, 2018

metamaskbot commented Jul 27, 2018

ipatka commented Jul 27, 2018

whymarrh commented Jul 27, 2018

ipatka commented Jul 27, 2018

ipatka commented Jul 27, 2018

bitpshr commented Jul 27, 2018 • edited Loading

This comment has been minimized.

bitpshr commented Sep 3, 2018 • edited Loading

sullof commented Sep 4, 2018

bitpshr commented Sep 10, 2018 • edited Loading

metamaskbot commented Sep 10, 2018

bitpshr Sep 10, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bitpshr Sep 10, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bitpshr Sep 10, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

danfinlay Sep 12, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

metamaskbot commented Sep 11, 2018

danfinlay Sep 12, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

danfinlay left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

metamaskbot commented Sep 13, 2018

loriopatrick commented Oct 15, 2018

loriopatrick commented Oct 17, 2018

bitpshr commented Jul 15, 2018 •

edited

Loading

bitpshr commented Jul 25, 2018 •

edited

Loading

bitpshr commented Jul 27, 2018 •

edited

Loading

bitpshr commented Sep 3, 2018 •

edited

Loading

bitpshr commented Sep 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

bitpshr Sep 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

bitpshr Sep 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading