feat: account abstraction for hash & signature #748

PhilippeR26 · 2023-09-08T14:45:30Z

Motivation and Resolution

Starknet.js was not able to interact with accounts including account abstraction about the hash and the signature of a transaction.

Source about account abstraction :

Usage related changes

DAPPS coded with Starknet.js v5.19.5, without signature account abstraction, have nothing to change.

The signature abstraction can be implemented in 5 cases. For each case, a function has to be created explaining how to perform this custom hash +signature :

Starknet.js method	Custom hash function	Custom signature function	Custom hash + signature function	Account contract function
myContract.invoke myAccount.execute myAccount.deployContract	N/A	N/A	abstractedTransactionSign()	__validate__ __execute__
myAccount.deployAccount	N/A	N/A	abstractedDeployAccountSign()	__validate-deploy__
myAccount.declare	N/A	N/A	abstractedDeclareSign()	__validate-declare__
myAccount.signMessage myAccount.hashMessage	abstractedMessageHash()	abstractedMessageSign()	N/A	isValidSignature()

These functions have to respect the following signatures :

export type AbstractionDeployAccountFunctionSign = (
  standardInputData: DeployAccountSignerDetails,
  privateKey: string,
  ...additionalParams: string[]
) => Signature;

export type AbstractionTransactionFunctionSign = (
  standardInputData: {
    contractAddress: BigNumberish;
    version: BigNumberish;
    calldata: RawCalldata;
    maxFee: BigNumberish;
    chainId: StarknetChainId;
    nonce: BigNumberish;
  },
  privateKey: string,
  ...additionalParams: string[]
) => Signature;

export type AbstractionDeclareFunctionSign = (
  standardInputData: DeclareSignerDetails,
  privateKey: string,
  ...additionalParams: string[]
) => Signature;

export type AbstractionMessageFunctionHash = (
  typedData: TypedData,
  accountAddress: string,
  ...additionalParams: string[]
) => string;

export type AbstractionMessageFunctionSign = (
  msgHash: string,
  privateKey: string,
  ...additionalParams: string[]
) => Signature;

Example of each case is shown in the guides.

export const abstractionFns: AbstractionFunctions = {
    abstractedDeployAccountSign: signDeployAccount,
    abstractedTransactionSign: signTransaction,
    abstractedDeclareSign: signDeclare,
    abstractedMessageHash: hashMessage,
    abstractedMessageSign: signMessage
}

Create a specific signer, using this list of functions.

const signerAbstraction = new AbstractedSigner(privateKeyAbstraction, abstractionFns);

Create an Account instance, using this signer.

const accountAbstraction = new Account(provider, addressAbstraction, signerAbstraction, "1"); // "1" for a Cairo 1 account contract

Interact with Starknet :

const call2 = contractETH.populate("transfer", {
        recipient: accountAddress0,
        amount: 300_000
    });
const { transaction_hash: th2 } = await accountAbstraction.execute(
    call2,
    undefined,
    undefined,
    4, 5, 6); // abstraction is here

A new function has been implemented : account.verifyMessageLocally() for EIP712 like JSON.
Nota : no changes have been made in the ContractFactory class.

Development related changes

Without any modifications in __tests__, tests are passed, meaning that all the new code has not impacted current DAPPS.
A script to test the deployment of a Braavos account, with deploy account abstraction, has been successfully tested.
No tests have been currently implemented. A Cairo v2.1.0 account contract including all cases of signature abstraction will be created and tested.
Probably a new test file will be created for this specific subject.

Checklist:

Performed a self-review of the code
Rebased to the last commit of the target branch (or merged it into my branch)
Documented the changes in code (API docs will be generated automatically)
Guides updated
Updated the tests
All tests are passing (with no change performed in tests)

netlify · 2023-09-08T14:45:35Z

✅ Deploy Preview for starknetjs ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	`c829e3a`
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/starknetjs/deploys/64fb338ba2a3ae0008edff4d
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-748--starknetjs.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

PhilippeR26 · 2023-09-13T09:17:38Z

I just ended to code an abstracted account contract.
I took an OpenZeppelin 0.7.0 account (coded for Cairo v2.2.0). I tortured it until it accepts Cairo v2.1.0 compiler. Then I added abstraction everywhere.
I tested it, and it works...
Starknet.js can interact with an account with specific hashes and signatures.
I will now start Jest tests.
I will probably create a specific test file for this subject.

PhilippeR26 · 2023-09-14T12:06:49Z

Tests added.
Ready for review.

janek26 · 2023-09-18T09:25:34Z

Hey @PhilippeR26 !

I think the class would get too many use cases probably. I would rather enforce a good split into private, protected and public methods in the Account class implementation and stay with the standard class way of extending, like

export NewSignatureSigner extends Signer {
  constructor() {
    super()
  }

  public override transactionSign() {
    // do something before
    super.transactionSign() // eventually use the existing method at some point
    // do something after
  }
}

Why do you need such a customizable Account and Signer object? :)

PhilippeR26 · 2023-09-18T09:34:44Z

Many teams are working on Account Abstraction, and their accounts will not be handled with the current code of Starknet.js.
For example, for Account deploy, Braavos has a specific way to hash and sign, using or not their hardware signer. We can see development for 2FA, SMS/email passwords. And I think that we are just at the beginning of the use of account abstraction.

__mocks__/cairo/accountAbstraction/account_astraction.cairo

__tests__/accountAbstraction.test.ts

ivpavici · 2023-09-18T09:41:03Z

src/account/default.ts

-      { classHash: declare.class_hash, salt, unique, constructorCalldata },
-      details
-    );
+    const deploy = addsAbstractionDeploy


can this ternary operator be avoided and handled in the deployContract function?

Same.
If not made this way, the compiler requests an iterator in the type BigNumberish[]|undefined
and I don't know how to handle a such case.

ivpavici · 2023-09-18T09:41:49Z

src/account/default.ts

  ): Promise<DeclareDeployUDCResponse> {
    const { constructorCalldata, salt, unique } = payload;
-    let declare = await this.declareIfNot(payload, details);
+
+    let declare = addsAbstractionDeclare


can this ternary operator be avoided and handled in the declareIfNot function?

If not made this way, the compiler requests an iterator in the type BigNumberish[]|undefined
and I don't know how to handle a such case.

PhilippeR26 · 2023-09-24T18:08:57Z

As required, a new AbstractedSigner has been created, the current Signer remains unchanged.
Guides updated in accordance.

ivpavici · 2023-09-25T10:24:24Z

src/abstractedSigner/default.ts

+import { AbstractedSignerInterface } from './interface';
+
+export class AbstractedSigner extends Signer implements AbstractedSignerInterface {
+  // constructor() {


I think you are not in the last commit 8dc277b

ivpavici · 2023-09-25T10:26:14Z

src/abstractedSigner/default.ts

+    this.abstractionFunctions = abstractedFns;
+  }
+
+  // public override transactionSign() {


I think you are not in the last commit 8dc277b

ivpavici · 2023-09-25T11:44:32Z

src/abstractedSigner/interface.ts

+} from '../types';
+
+export abstract class AbstractedSignerInterface {
+  public abstract abstractionFunctions: AbstractionFunctions | undefined;


missing docs here?

In all the project, properties of classes are not documented.
If requested, I can add documentation for the AbstractedSigner class properties.

ivpavici · 2023-09-26T12:15:30Z

src/abstractedSigner/interface.ts

+  TypedData,
+} from '../types';
+
+export abstract class AbstractedSignerInterface {


I will leave to others to give input, but as it is currently, this interface has no effect on the AbstractedSigner (the main effect comes from the Signer itself)

ivpavici · 2023-09-26T13:17:07Z

src/account/default.ts

  ): Promise<Invocation> {
    const calldata = getExecuteCalldata(call, this.cairoVersion);
-    const signature = await this.signer.signTransaction(call, signerDetails);
+    const signature =
+      'abstractionFunctions' in this.signer


I feel like this could be avoided if we expand the original SignerInterface with optional parameters for addsAbstraction. cc: @tabaktoni

ivpavici · 2023-09-26T13:26:15Z

src/account/interface.ts

   * @returns response from estimate_fee
   */
  public abstract estimateInvokeFee(
    calls: AllowArray<Call>,
-    estimateFeeDetails?: EstimateFeeDetails
+    estimateFeeDetails?: EstimateFeeDetails,


could we push everything related to ...addsAbstraction inside the estimateFeeDetails ? The same applies for all other methods here
cc: @tabaktoni

The number of parameters of abstraction are unknown.
Should be replaced by an array.
My feeling is that it will complicate the user experience.

ivpavici · 2023-09-26T13:28:29Z

src/contract/interface.ts

   * @returns Add Transaction Response
   */
  public abstract invoke(
    method: string,
    args?: ArgsOrCalldata,
-    options?: InvokeOptions
+    options?: InvokeOptions,
+    ...addsAbstraction: BigNumberish[]


here also, could we just push stuff through options ?

Same comment. To balance with UX.

ivpavici · 2023-09-26T13:32:26Z

src/account/default.ts

-      nonce,
-      blockIdentifier,
-    });
+    const adds: string[] = addsAbstraction.map((param) => toHex(param));


this line of code is repeated in a lot of places, it would be cool if we could do something different, we can think about it

May be with num.bigNumberishArrayToHexadecimalStringArray()?

ivpavici · 2023-09-26T13:34:32Z

src/account/default.ts

-      version,
-      nonce,
-    });
+    const signature =


this could also be avoided if we change the SignerInterface

ivpavici · 2023-09-26T13:34:54Z

src/account/default.ts

-      addressSalt,
-      constructorCalldata: compiledCalldata,
-    });
+    const signature =


this could also be avoided if we change the SignerInterface

tabaktoni · 2024-03-18T10:09:01Z

After releasing v6 final, as c1 gets more stable with c1 acc we can review this one.
Maybe we should close this one, and create new resuing some elements but before implementation, discuss how to introduce it most elegantly.

PhilippeR26 · 2024-03-22T12:33:56Z

Following Toni request, PR closed.

Merge branch 'SignerAbstraction'

c829e3a

PhilippeR26 marked this pull request as ready for review September 13, 2023 10:11

PhilippeR26 added 2 commits September 13, 2023 20:34

test: account abstraction

79a11a6

ci: merge v5.19.6

185b469

ivpavici requested a review from dhruvkelawala September 18, 2023 09:07

ivpavici reviewed Sep 18, 2023

View reviewed changes

PhilippeR26 added 4 commits September 20, 2023 17:11

style: implement comments

7a2c677

test: cleanup

97aa936

refactor: new class AbstractedSigner

0802f7e

docs: finalize guides

8cd2333

PhilippeR26 requested a review from ivpavici September 24, 2023 18:09

PhilippeR26 added 2 commits September 25, 2023 16:28

fix: add AbstractedSignerInterface in account.signer

e07dcbe

style: cleanup of method names in AbstractedSigner

8dc277b

ivpavici reviewed Sep 26, 2023

View reviewed changes

PhilippeR26 mentioned this pull request Oct 5, 2023

bug: default value doesn't exists as mentioned in docs #773

Closed

ivpavici linked an issue Oct 26, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request

Transaction signature should support randomness #725

Open

PhilippeR26 mentioned this pull request Feb 7, 2024

Transaction signature should support randomness #725

Open

PhilippeR26 closed this Mar 22, 2024

ivpavici mentioned this pull request Jul 2, 2024

Adding Ledger Signer support #1168

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

feat: account abstraction for hash & signature #748

feat: account abstraction for hash & signature #748

PhilippeR26 commented Sep 8, 2023 •

edited

Loading

netlify bot commented Sep 8, 2023 •

edited

Loading

PhilippeR26 commented Sep 13, 2023

PhilippeR26 commented Sep 14, 2023

janek26 commented Sep 18, 2023

PhilippeR26 commented Sep 18, 2023

ivpavici Sep 18, 2023

PhilippeR26 Sep 18, 2023

ivpavici Sep 18, 2023

PhilippeR26 Sep 18, 2023

PhilippeR26 commented Sep 24, 2023

ivpavici Sep 25, 2023

PhilippeR26 Sep 27, 2023

ivpavici Sep 25, 2023

PhilippeR26 Sep 27, 2023

ivpavici Sep 25, 2023

PhilippeR26 Sep 27, 2023 •

edited

Loading

ivpavici Sep 26, 2023

ivpavici Sep 26, 2023

ivpavici Sep 26, 2023

PhilippeR26 Sep 27, 2023

ivpavici Sep 26, 2023

PhilippeR26 Sep 27, 2023

ivpavici Sep 26, 2023

PhilippeR26 Sep 27, 2023

ivpavici Sep 26, 2023

ivpavici Sep 26, 2023

tabaktoni commented Mar 18, 2024

PhilippeR26 commented Mar 22, 2024

feat: account abstraction for hash & signature #748

feat: account abstraction for hash & signature #748

Conversation

PhilippeR26 commented Sep 8, 2023 • edited Loading

Motivation and Resolution

Usage related changes

Development related changes

Checklist:

netlify bot commented Sep 8, 2023 • edited Loading

✅ Deploy Preview for starknetjs ready!

PhilippeR26 commented Sep 13, 2023

PhilippeR26 commented Sep 14, 2023

janek26 commented Sep 18, 2023

PhilippeR26 commented Sep 18, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

PhilippeR26 commented Sep 24, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

PhilippeR26 Sep 27, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tabaktoni commented Mar 18, 2024

PhilippeR26 commented Mar 22, 2024

PhilippeR26 commented Sep 8, 2023 •

edited

Loading

netlify bot commented Sep 8, 2023 •

edited

Loading

PhilippeR26 Sep 27, 2023 •

edited

Loading