Safe property access / allow transaction with undefined to fields, in signTransaction #98
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Gudahtt
reviewed
Aug 27, 2021
index.js
Outdated
| @@ -255,8 +255,7 @@ class LedgerBridgeKeyring extends EventEmitter { | |||
| rawTxHex = tx.type === 0 || !tx.type | |||
| ? ethUtil.rlp.encode(tx.getMessageToSign(false)).toString('hex') | |||
| : tx.getMessageToSign(false).toString('hex') | |||
|
|
|||
| return this._signTransaction(address, rawTxHex, tx.to.buf, (payload) => { | |||
| return this._signTransaction(address, rawTxHex, tx.to && tx.to.buf, (payload) => { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It looks to me like passing in nothing for toAddress will result in the to field passed to the Ledger device being set to 0x0. That doesn't seem right 🤔 . Should _signTransaction omit the to field instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🤦♂️
Actually, after merging #95, the to field isn't even needed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have simply removed the to parameter in 8f2195c
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That works! Though if you wanted to remove the dependency on #95, I think this would also be safe to merge if to was omitted for contract deployments, but passed in otherwise.
…elds, in signTransaction" This reverts commit 3c148ba.
|
Adding a DO NOT MERGE label, as this now depends on #95 |
Merged
julianariel
pushed a commit
to block-wallet/eth-ledger-bridge-keyring
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 27, 2022
… signTransaction (MetaMask#98) * Safe property access / allow transaction with undefined to fields, in signTransaction * Revert "Safe property access / allow transaction with undefined to fields, in signTransaction" This reverts commit 3c148ba. * Remove passage of to param to ledger bridge, which will not be needed after PR MetaMask#95
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
With #68, we started directly accessing a
.bufproperty ontx.toinsignTransaction. This was necessary given changes in ethereumjs-txThe problem is that the
tofield can be undefined. This is necessary for deploying contracts. Currently, in prod, if you attempt to create a contract deployment transaction with ledger in metamask, you will see an error because oftx.to.bufandtx.tobeing undefined.This PR fixes that.