-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 180
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
Resolves issue 621 - Verify Address for exported Xpub Option #629
base: dev
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Changing KEY_BACKSPACE size on ToolsDiceEntropy and ToolsCoinFlip screens
Missed import sentence for commands added on last commit
This reverts commit 7c26811.
This reverts commit e8b0e35.
On class SeedExportXpubQRDisplayView(View): Replaces "Destination" return call from MainMenuView to ScanAddressView. Rest of changes are for passing seed_num between class calling.
Changes for passing seed_num between class calling (for ScanAddressView class).
Test for seed views workflow affected.
Very cool. But I would suggest an intermediate screen. We have to explain what the second camera live preview is expecting to scan.
|
Thanks for your feedback, Keith. I will try, that makes sense. |
Added SeedExportXpubQRAskVerifyAddView(View) class for intermediate screen asking for verifying address or done action after exporting Xpub
Added FlowStep(seed_views.SeedExportXpubQRAskVerifyAddView, screen_return_value=0) to seed flow tests.
Added AdviceScreen class
Resolves conflicts from previous merger
Resolves conflicts from previous merger
Resolves conflicts from previous merger
Resolves conflicts from previous merger
Resolves conflicts from previous merger
Added AdviceScreen class.
Resolves conflicts from previous merger
Resolves conflicts from previous merger
Added FlowStep(seed_views.SeedExportXpubQRAskVerifyAddView, screen_return_value=0) to seed flow tests.
Added new Screenshot for SeedExportXpubQRAskVerifyAddView
|
Reviewed and tried this pr at 2047506 This is nice functionality. I like that it helps teach users to verify their watch-only wallet setup.
|
Hi @jdlcdl . Thanks for reviewing and comments. Sounds good that wording improvement. Note the headline with text "Check new wallet", below icon, is it useful? would you change it? About this,
I agree, and think I'm almost there. |
Just noticing that this pr raises an error if an address is scanned before any seed has been loaded. What is expected instead is to land at the "load a seed" view so that user can load a seed in various ways. Error looks like:
Will leave a marker in code comment if I see it. Otherwise, things are a moving target lately, we'll catch all the bugs before merge/release. |
src/seedsigner/views/scan_views.py
Outdated
@@ -133,6 +133,8 @@ def run(self): | |||
from seedsigner.views.seed_views import AddressVerificationStartView | |||
address = self.decoder.get_address() | |||
(script_type, network) = self.decoder.get_address_type() | |||
seed_num = self.seed_num |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Cannot always be assumed that object has .seed_num, sometimes user will scan an address first, afterwards should be prompted to load a seed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fixed on 1e63527 commit.
only includes "seed_num" when this exists.
Only ask for verification xpub address option when SINGLE_SIG
Solves view wording
Fixes test flows regarding ask xpub address verification only when SINGLE_SIG
Resolves missing member declaration
Thank you! I was not realized that there are two ways to scan an address before load a seed (Tools/Verify and SCAN directly, last I did catch it, curiously the most obvious). I logged the fix on marked commented code. I have solved you suggested about not to ask xpub address verification when multi-signature on workflow, updating workflow test, too (all pytested and emulator tested). On screen wording I left without that yellow words but I read your opinion, of course, so you can tell me what you think is better. @jdlcdl Nice to meet you on passed 2024 and thanks again for your kindly reviews and all the best for you too right now! 2025 will rock! |
Description
Because workflow of exportpubkey would must to be securely closed verifying addresses obtained on wallet software (Sparrow, for instance), issue reported #621 is conceptual consistent.
This pull request is categorized as a:
Checklist
pytest
and made sure all unit tests pass before sumbitting the PR. They was updated, too.If you modified or added functionality/workflow, did you add new unit tests?
I have tested this PR on the following platforms/os:
Fixes #621
Note: Keep your changes limited in scope; if you uncover other issues or improvements along the way, ideally submit those as a separate PR. The more complicated the PR the harder to review, test, and merge.