f(x)Wallet and WalletConnect

Bugs & Issues
1

Hi @Richard and @zerogravity !

I’d like to be able to setup a web app using WalletConnect to sign transactions over f(x)Wallet, in the same way proposal votes are being voted over the Function X explorer right now.
Could you point me to some guides in order to be able to do this please ?

Thanks/
@FrenchXCore

2

@FrenchXCore You would need the chainId and RPC URL in order to use WalletConnect on f(x)Wallet. It also depends on whether the f(x)Wallet has the network support. @Richard would be able to advice you on that.

1 Like
3

@Richard , @zerogravity ,

Right now, i’m interfacing great with WalletConnect on f(x)Wallet.
But I’m still blocked trying to use functionx_sign Session.MethodCall.Custom method.
I’d be glad I had some help around this…

4

Hi buddies !!

I spent 2 days trying to find out how to sign a custom transaction using f(x)Wallet and my own dApp.
I used the current stable version and the latest Beta version.
It appears that even if my transaction arrives correctly at my f(x)Wallet (see attached picture).

photo_2022-08-22_03-00-30
photo_2022-08-22_03-00-30576×1280 51 KB

And even if I sign it, it comes back as “User rejected : 40001” to my dApp… driving me crazy…

Is f(x)Wallet actually capable of signing an FX transaction coming from outside ?

Thanks.

FrenchXCore

5

Hi @FrenchXCore, currently f(x)Wallet doesn’t support Dapp integration, but the next version will support. do you have a public webpage so we can try to possibly have a workaround?

6

It’s not deployed yet. Could you dm me the approx release date of fxw 2.0?

1 Like
7

@Richard , it appears I managed to sign a transaction using f(x)Wallet.
The issue was that, while using the “functionx_sign” WalletConnect method of f(x)Wallet, I was submitting the complete SignDoc object for signature whereas f(x)Wallet is expecting just the SHA256 hash of the SignDoc.
So, when using f(x)Wallet, and using the “functionx_sign” WalletConnect method of f(x)Wallet thru a custom request, the following object needs to be used :

{
      id: new Date().getTime(),     ---> can be anything actually
      jsonrpc: '2.0',
      method: "functionx_sign",
      params: [*address*, *hash*]
}
  1. address can be the signing account address, or the HD path to be used (e.g. “44H/118H/0H/0/0”)
  2. hash is the SHA256 hash of the /cosmos/tx/v1beta1/tx/SignDoc serialized object

From there, f(x)Wallet (current v1.0) accept the incoming signing request and sends back an object :
{ 'sign' : '***signature of the Tx***', publicKey: '***public key of the account used to sign the Tx***' }

I hope f(x)Wallet v2.0 will keep the same interface.

Regards.

8

AND… IT… WORKS… !!!
https://twitter.com/FrenchXCore1/status/1564232845501075458

3 Likes
9

i dont understand,

what is difference between FxWallet and this?

10

Hi @Aritz_Bahamonde !

Can you vote from f(x)Wallet ?
Can you autocompound using f(x)Wallet ?
Can you do multitransfer using f(x)Wallet ?

Those are some of the differences…

But mainly, it offers the possibility to anyone to propose services directly from a website.
Let’s say : tomorrow, I want to propose a button to pay for a service in $FX (like Paypal button), I can now do it. But you’ll still need f(x)Wallet (and your code or fingerprint) to sign the transactions.

Regards,
FrenchXCore

5 Likes
11

ah ok, i understand it a little more now thanks for the answer.

sounds good

1 Like
12

@Richard , @lancelai ,

Is there a way to pass the WalletConnect URI as an argument to fxdapp://navigation intent ?
I’d like to offer a user to connect to their f(x)wallet from their mobile phone without having to scan the QRCode (which encodes itself the WalletConnect URI) ?

Thanks.

13

Another question for the team and community…
What should be the name of the open source Vue.js WalletConnect module ?
I don’t wanna name it FXConnect because that would stand in the middle of team’s prduct names.
Any idea ?

14

FxLock

15

Fxunlock maybe… Thanks @Aritz_Bahamonde

1 Like
16

Hello Frenchxcore.

Your Dapp sounds really good and it’s something that we all can benefit from, looking forward to it, and with more community feedbacks once its up and running is gonna be great.

With all the nice features you have, let’s call it French kiss, kidding of course.

I would say having your own naming structure or distinguishable from the FX terms wouldn’t be the worst of ideas, since we know already you have two Dapps in the making… :crossed_fingers:

And over time, I feel you’re more than capable of making other Dapps with your skill sets and programmabilities. Just something to consider for long term…

@Riz_Truth (your great at names, not sure Where’s his gone actually) he was very active here. I’ll dm him to check up, hope his alright.

Having said all that, the other contention is that all the services it provides is for fx, and fxunlock is such a smooth name. I am finding it very difficult to top this tbh :grinning:. It’s very fitting to the cause.

#FXunlock
It’s available too via company house website.

Still tried to have a crack at it, as follows;

#Web3pay is taken

#Web3core available

#web3exchange available

#Cryptoweb3 available

#fxweb3 available

1 Like
17

I wouldn’t be surprised if French Kiss actually works. :joy: That was funny @Superbit123

Crypto projects have a tendency to use funny names and it actually went viral. :speak_no_evil: :see_no_evil:
(with a working product too, of course)

1 Like
18

:rofl::rofl::rofl:
Now, I.m hesitating between FrenchKiss and FxUnlock.
Anyway, I’m waiting for fxwallet2.0 to check the full compatibility and see if there’s a feature to avoid qrscan like me there is on maiar app for Elrond.
Thx buddies !!

2 Likes
19

or…>>>FXBolt

1 Like
20

Will be supported in the new version of fxwallet, fxwallet will be online soon

1 Like