You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
(the input for owner in the Step 2 should be a dropdown of addresses already in the wallet)
Then, the smart account is then shown in your wallet like any other address, but Rabby will intelligently sign for the account using the address the user specifies when importing the smart account.
There will need to be some consideration on handling websites that don't support EIP-1271 so the user isn't confused when their signature fails. Maybe it's enough to check isValidSignature() when prompting the user for confirmation and show a clear message?
Users will also need to be aware the smart account will function differently from an EOA, but I assume someone importing one into their wallet knows the caveats. Is that a bad assumption?
I'm willing to help implement this if you're interested.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is Rabby interested in adding support for smart accounts?
Recent discussions on x (https://x.com/apoorvlathey/status/1775241280550756783?s=20, https://x.com/optimizoor/status/1775431530426638673?s=20) have made it clear this is a pain point.
The UX I'm imagining:
(the input for owner in the Step 2 should be a dropdown of addresses already in the wallet)
Then, the smart account is then shown in your wallet like any other address, but Rabby will intelligently sign for the account using the address the user specifies when importing the smart account.
There will need to be some consideration on handling websites that don't support EIP-1271 so the user isn't confused when their signature fails. Maybe it's enough to check
isValidSignature()
when prompting the user for confirmation and show a clear message?Users will also need to be aware the smart account will function differently from an EOA, but I assume someone importing one into their wallet knows the caveats. Is that a bad assumption?
I'm willing to help implement this if you're interested.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: