Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat(walletconnect): walletconnect integration #2223

Open
wants to merge 124 commits into
base: dev
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

borngraced
Copy link
Member

@borngraced borngraced commented Sep 16, 2024

This PR introduces the integration of WalletConnect into the Komodo DeFi Framework (KDF), enabling secure wallet connections for Cosmos and EVM-based chains. KDF acts as the DApp(in this PR), allowing users to initiate and manage transactions securely with external wallets e.g via Metamask.
Key changes include:

  • Implement multi-session handling for concurrent WalletConnect connections across accounts, integrates SQLite/IndexedDB for persistent session storage across devices, enhances relayer disconnection handling for smoother session management
  • Implemented WalletConnect coin activation for Tendermint and EVM.
  • Implemented Withdraw and Swap functionalities for Tendermint and EVM

https://specs.walletconnect.com/2.0/specs/clients/sign/
https://specs.walletconnect.com/2.0/specs/clients/core/pairing/
https://specs.walletconnect.com/2.0/specs/clients/core/crypto/
https://specs.walletconnect.com/2.0/specs/servers/relay/
https://docs.reown.com/advanced/multichain/rpc-reference/ethereum-rpc

Additional improvements include cleanup of unused dependencies, minor code refinements, and WASM compatibility

Updated deps:
Added deps:
Removed deps:

How to test using EVM coin e.g ETH (Native && WASM)

  1. Start kdf (cargo run)
  2. Create WalletConnect session connection
    • Use the RPC below
    • Copy the connection URL and either:
      • Paste directly in your wallet or
      • Generate QR code using QR Code Generator and scan with your wallet (e.g., MetaMask)
{
     "method": "wc_new_connection",
	"userpass": "{{ _.userpass }}",
	"mmrpc": "2.0",
	"params": {
		"namespaces": {
			"eip155": {
				"chains": ["eip155:1"]
				"methods": [
					"eth_sendTransaction",
					"eth_signTransaction",
					"personal_sign"
				],
				"events": [
					"accountsChanged",
					"chainChanged"
				]
			}
		}
	}
}
  1. Activate ETH coin (set "priv_key_policy": "WalletConnect", in activation params).
  2. Approve authentication request in your Wallet
  3. Withdraw or trade.

Note: To add more eip155 chains, modify the chains array like this: ["eip155:1", "eip155:250"]

@borngraced borngraced self-assigned this Sep 16, 2024
@shamardy
Copy link
Collaborator

shamardy commented Nov 8, 2024

@onur-ozkan This PR requires your review on the tendermint code changes at least

@shamardy shamardy added the P2 label Nov 11, 2024
@laruh
Copy link
Member

laruh commented Nov 12, 2024

@borngraced cargo lock conflict occurred

Comment on lines +52 to +53
/// Activation via WalletConnect
WalletConnect,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you add some info about why we don't take public key similar to how it's done with WithPubkey variant?

Also, I'm curious why WithPubkey mode doesn’t work here. Doesn’t WalletConnect already provide the public key via an API? WithPubkey mode was intended to support any type of external wallet as it only requires the public key and doesn’t depend on the wallet’s internal logic.

Copy link
Member Author

@borngraced borngraced Nov 13, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

WalletConnect doesn’t directly provide the public key as part of the initial session information. Instead, it only returns the account address, methods and the chains the user can interact with. To obtain the public key, a separate request is required for the specific account

https://specs.walletconnect.com/2.0/specs/clients/sign/rpc-methods#wc_sessionsettle
https://specs.walletconnect.com/2.0/specs/clients/sign/session-proposal

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would have done it in a way where some library/crate (or even GUI side) handles this and then utilizes with_pubkey on core KDF side to have single entrypoint for any external wallet, so the complexity remains constant for N external wallet types.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this is like dividing this implementation into two (manages connection from GUI while kdf manages request handling ) or leaving everything entirely to GUI which is not what we wanted from the beginning.

So the thing is whoever wishes to use any wallet pubkey via WalletConnect needs to make an additional request which can't really be avoided.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What I mean was, we could handle that connection part and the extra request part (for getting pubkey) in a separate crate and utilize the with_pubkey mode. I mean, we have an abstraction layer for external wallets, so why not using it?

Copy link
Member Author

@borngraced borngraced Nov 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

we could handle that connection part and the extra request part (for getting pubkey) in a separate crate

how do you plan to do this? since, we either ways we still need to request for pubkey meanwhile with_pubkey params requires pubkey in activation params itself. There's a kdf_walletconnect crate that handles all WC logic By the way,.

WalletConnect coin activation mode lets the activation logic handle the session and fetch the key directly, setting it in TendermintActivationPolicy::PublicKey—keeping things simple without needing an abstraction layer.

Also, the current external wallet implementation for tendermint uses SSE, in the case of Keplr, we need to send request to GUI then to Keplr wallet if I'm correct, so it can't directly work with WalletConnect. The current activation logic is quite easy to understand and scale(when integrating KDF as Wallet in the future)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

how do you plan to do this? since, we either ways we still need to request for pubkey meanwhile with_pubkey params requires pubkey in activation params itself. There's a kdf_walletconnect crate that handles all WC logic By the way,.

User sends the activation request for WC -> KDF takes the request and runs the logic where it reads Pubkey from WC -> Uses that Pubkey to run KDF as an external wallet (just like any other wallet).

Is that not possible?

Also, the current external wallet implementation for tendermint uses SSE, in the case of Keplr, we need to send request to GUI then to Keplr wallet if I'm correct, so it can't directly work with WalletConnect. The current activation logic is quite easy to understand and scale(when integrating KDF as Wallet in the future)

Yeah, for Keplr, GUI side triggers the Keplr events which when required. But it doesn't have to be the same way for WalletConnect.

Copy link
Member Author

@borngraced borngraced Nov 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

User sends the activation request for WC -> KDF takes the request and runs the logic where it reads Pubkey from WC -> Uses that Pubkey to run KDF as an external wallet (just like any other wallet).

that's how the current flow works.. or am getting something wrong..
User request coin activation, logic checks if TendermintPubkeyActivationParams::WalletConnect( we can't use WithPubkey, since we don't have the pubkey at start)

TendermintPubkeyActivationParams::WalletConnect => {
activate_with_walletconnect(&ctx, protocol_conf.chain_id.as_ref(), &ticker).await?
},

then KDF takes the request and runs the logic where it reads Pubkey from WC( maybe this function should have a different naming)

async fn activate_with_walletconnect(
ctx: &MmArc,
chain_id: &str,
ticker: &str,
) -> MmResult<(TendermintActivationPolicy, TendermintWalletConnectionType), TendermintInitError> {
let wc = WalletConnectCtx::from_ctx(ctx).expect("WalletConnectCtx should be initialized by now!");
let account = cosmos_get_accounts_impl(&wc, chain_id)
.await
.mm_err(|err| TendermintInitError {
ticker: ticker.to_string(),
kind: TendermintInitErrorKind::UnableToFetchChainAccount(err.to_string()),
})?;
let wallet_type = if wc.is_ledger_connection().await {
TendermintWalletConnectionType::WcLedger
} else {
TendermintWalletConnectionType::Wc
};
let pubkey = match account.algo {
CosmosAccountAlgo::Secp256k1 | CosmosAccountAlgo::TendermintSecp256k1 => {
TendermintPublicKey::from_raw_secp256k1(&account.pubkey).ok_or(TendermintInitError {
ticker: ticker.to_string(),
kind: TendermintInitErrorKind::Internal("Invalid secp256k1 pubkey".to_owned()),
})?
},
};
Ok((TendermintActivationPolicy::with_public_key(pubkey), wallet_type))
}

Uses that Pubkey to run KDF as an external wallet (just like any other wallet).

Ok((TendermintActivationPolicy::with_public_key(pubkey), wallet_type))

mm2src/kdf_walletconnect/src/chain.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
mm2src/coins/tendermint/tendermint_token.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -276,6 +279,7 @@ impl TendermintActivationPolicy {

#[cfg(target_arch = "wasm32")]
PrivKeyPolicy::Metamask(_) => unreachable!(),
PrivKeyPolicy::WalletConnect { .. } => unreachable!(),
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Q: Is it really impossible to get the public key from WalletConnect?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

you mean privateKey?, No

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I read it wrong

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this method gets the pubkey though.
if i understand correctly this is marked as unreachable as we convert walletconnect variants to pubkey-only.
can we return an error here instead?

mm2src/coins/tendermint/tendermint_coin.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@mariocynicys mariocynicys left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the PR! Very organized and easy to review.
Here is the first iteration.

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
JEMALLOC_SYS_WITH_MALLOC_CONF = "background_thread:true,narenas:1,tcache:false,dirty_decay_ms:0,muzzy_decay_ms:0,metadata_thp:auto"

[target.'cfg(all())']
rustflags = [ "-Zshare-generics=y" ]
rustflags = [ "-Zshare-generics=y", '--cfg=curve25519_dalek_backend="fiat"' ]
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Q: what is that for?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

selecting the backend for compiling curve25519-dalek. This is explicitly needed because I updated the lib which now supports different backends for compilation

https://crates.io/crates/curve25519-dalek/4.1.3#simd-backend

mm2src/coins/eth/v2_activation.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mm2src/coins/eth/v2_activation.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mm2src/coins/eth/wallet_connect.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
mm2src/coins/eth/wallet_connect.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mm2src/mm2_main/src/rpc/dispatcher/dispatcher.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mm2src/coins/eth/wallet_connect.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mm2src/coins/utxo/utxo_common.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines +64 to +65
[patch.crates-io]
rand_core = { version = "0.6.2", package = "bip39" }
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Q: can't understand this patch. why doesn't it have a url/git? could you explain how/what this does.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, I'm forcing bip39 to depend on rand_core 0.6.2 since the lib is selecting the least supported version(0.4.2) in kdf even tho the version isn't really compatible with the latest version of bip39
https://crates.io/crates/bip39/2.1.0/dependencies, I mean the feature of bip39 we using in kdf requires rand_core 0.6.2 or greater

The lib is configured to select any version from 0.4.2==0.7

mm2src/mm2_main/src/rpc.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@mariocynicys mariocynicys left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

another short iteration. i think i will focus solely on the new crate in the next iteration since the rest looks good.

the new crate i think is very well organized and easy to traverse. could make use of excessive spamy detailed (doc) comments though. this way others who didn't review it could still understand and change it.

@@ -276,6 +279,7 @@ impl TendermintActivationPolicy {

#[cfg(target_arch = "wasm32")]
PrivKeyPolicy::Metamask(_) => unreachable!(),
PrivKeyPolicy::WalletConnect { .. } => unreachable!(),
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this method gets the pubkey though.
if i understand correctly this is marked as unreachable as we convert walletconnect variants to pubkey-only.
can we return an error here instead?

Comment on lines +186 to +198
let mut vec = Vec::new();
for i in 0..map.len() {
if let Some(Value::Number(num)) = map.get(&i.to_string()) {
if let Some(byte) = num.as_u64() {
vec.push(byte as u8);
} else {
return Err(serde::de::Error::custom("Invalid byte value"));
}
} else {
return Err(serde::de::Error::custom("Invalid format"));
}
}
Ok(vec)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit suggestion:

            map.values()
                .map(|v| {
                    v.as_u64()
                        .map(|v| v as u8)
                        .ok_or_else(|| serde::de::Error::custom("Invalid byte value"))
                })
                .collect()

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

these aren't equivalent

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

only diff i think is Some(Value::Number(num)) = map.get() to check if the value is a number? right?
I don't think that's really important to set one error message for numbers vs non-numbers bad bytes. also we should do the same for conversion from u64 to u8.

@@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ async fn process_single_request(ctx: MmArc, req: Json, client: SocketAddr) -> Re

#[cfg(not(target_arch = "wasm32"))]
async fn rpc_service(req: Request<Body>, ctx_h: u32, client: SocketAddr) -> Response<Body> {
const NON_ALLOWED_CHARS: &[char] = &['<', '>', '&'];
const NON_ALLOWED_CHARS: &[char] = &['Ò'];
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

what's that char and why is it disallowed? if it's a place holder we could instead remove this validation all together.

mm2src/kdf_walletconnect/src/session.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mm2src/kdf_walletconnect/src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mm2src/kdf_walletconnect/src/session.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mm2src/kdf_walletconnect/src/chain.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mm2src/kdf_walletconnect/src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mm2src/kdf_walletconnect/src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mm2src/coins/eth/wallet_connect.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mm2src/coins/eth/wallet_connect.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
};

let mut public = Public::default();
public.as_mut().copy_from_slice(&uncompressed[1..65]);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ummm, looks like we skip the first 8bits of the H520, thus rendering it essentially an H512. maybe we could return a Public = H512 instead of PublicKey = H520 from recover().

that's just an early suggestion, i will want to check what these trimmed 8bits actually for first.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why is this changed needed ? I think its more appropriate to return Seckp2561 pubkey here

pub(crate) fn recover(signature: &Signature, message: &Message) -> Result<PublicKey, ethkey::Error> {
let recovery_id = {
let recovery_id = (signature[64] as i32)
.checked_sub(27)
.ok_or_else(|| ethkey::Error::InvalidSignature)?;
RecoveryId::from_i32(recovery_id)?
};
let sig = RecoverableSignature::from_compact(&signature[0..64], recovery_id)?;
let pubkey = Secp256k1::new().recover(&secp256k1::Message::from_slice(&message[..])?, &sig)?;
Ok(pubkey)
}

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

not really needed. but I'm trying to understand why we have two different pubkey types and making them into one if possible.
will dig more into it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants