feat(mobile): add integration with gateway backend for notifications feature #4878
Conversation
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Step 1: Generate delegate key | ||
| const delegateMnemonic = ethers.Wallet.createRandom().mnemonic?.phrase |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do we need mnemonic here? Why don#t we go for creating a random private key?
const wallet = Wallet.createRandom(provider);
console.log(wallet.privatekey)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good catch. I'll avoid the Mnemonic.
| const encryptedDelegateKey = await DeviceCrypto.encrypt(asymmetricKey, delegatedAccount.privateKey, { | ||
| biometryTitle: 'Authenticate', | ||
| biometrySubTitle: 'Saving delegated key', | ||
| biometryDescription: 'Please authenticate yourself', | ||
| }) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we don't need this kind of protection for the delegate key. It is not going to sign transactions and can be exchanged at any point.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
aren't we showing and allowing users to revoke these keys? we can store it on redux only then. wdyt?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, I meant that we don't need biometry protection. Users should be able to remove the keys as in the old app.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Removed already.
Branch preview✅ Deploy successful! Storybook: |
| @@ -90,6 +90,7 @@ | |||
| "react-native-device-info": "^14.0.1", | |||
| "react-native-draggable-flatlist": "^4.0.1", | |||
| "react-native-gesture-handler": "~2.20.2", | |||
| "react-native-get-random-values": "^1.11.0", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
before we add this package I would actually want to know why is quick-crypto not doing this. Maybe we are calling the polyfills from it too late?
| const signerAccount = ownerPrivateKey ? new Wallet(ownerPrivateKey) : Wallet.createRandom() | ||
|
|
||
| if (!signerAccount) { | ||
| throw Logger.error(ERROR_MSG, error) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this could be moved to a getSignerAccount function
| const ownerPrivateKey = await getPrivateKey() | ||
|
|
||
| try { | ||
| if (!ownerAddress || !activeSafe || !nonce || !fcmToken) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
could be moved to a validate function.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think that if the try block is structured as:
validateParameters(...)
const ownerPrivateKey = await getPrivateKey(...)
const signerAccount = await createSignerAccount(ownerPrivateKey)
if (!signerAccount) throw new Error(ERROR_MSG)
const siweMessage = generateSiweMessage(...)
// Verify the delegate on the backend and subscribe for notifications.
await verifyAndSubscribeDelegate(...)
it would make it way easier to read and follow
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also what you get is separation of conserns. We abstract everything in small, testable functions. It not only improves readibility, but also makes it easier to unit test.
| } | ||
| }, []) | ||
|
|
||
| const createOnBackEnd = useCallback( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe something like authenticateAndSubscribeDelate would be more on point?
What it solves
Resolves #
How this PR fixes it
How to test it
Screenshots
Checklist