Idea name: Using own ethereum address for chat
Description: It would be convenient if one could use his existing ethereum address for the chat application. This way everybody who already has an ENS record does not need another one. Also assets do not need to be moved
Use case: As a user, I just want to type in the seed for my general ethereum account and be ready to go. No other username or address needed.
Target user: People who already use Ethereum, have an ENS record and funds
Why this is important: Make ethereum and Status more connected
Hey,
I think what you mean is that an ethereum address could use its own keypair to communicate on Status.
This is how it worked in the past, the problem with that is using the same signature for transactions and messages. Thats why Status proposed this ERC-1581: Non-wallet usage of keys derived from BIP-32 trees.
It’s something that Status probably wont go into this suggestion. Maybe you can try changing your proposal to something like “allow ethereum address to set its chat key (without using ENS)”.
What status currently use is ENS, you can use any ENS domain and configure your chat id there, so you share your ENS name for people talk with you.
If you own an ENS name, you just have to configure your Status Wallet address as the “Controller” of that name, and use the Profile->ENS name, enter the your existent ens name there, and make the transaction to configure the resolver.
Feel free to provide suggestion on how to improve the existent ENS names system.
5 Likes
My dApp really needs a good way for people to chat based on nothing but public keys they’ve used to register in the dApp. https://github.com/0xAnonymous/Polytopia/blob/main/Polytopia.sol
@Johan can you elaborate on why this would need to be the same address as the one connected with the dapp?
Or, in other words, if you see a reason that this proposal would not work:
Yes, thats what I mean. Thanks for the explanation.
the address a valid account identifier, all accounts in my dApp are completely anonymous, so does not add anything at all to force users to also submit some other account identifier. You’re free to study what my dApp is about if you want, https://osf.io/4tkh8/, but if not then I guess you’d argue your case and I’d repeat my case. best regards.
I think you’re looking at it from the wrong angle, not “why is it needed” but “why isn’t it?”. Key-to-key messaging is awesome. Adding other options too is also good, but I don’t myself see why the address or public key shouldn’t be base account identifier.
Reasons Online Pseudonym Parties would not favour any more personal account identifiers, people are supposed to be anonymous, no benefit from anything less anonymous than public address. People are supposed to mix their keys each month and use a new address, so, no benefit from “memorable” names, at all. No one is supposed to be memorable in the system, since the system knows nothing about anyone.
1 Like
Easy peasy 
I think this should be exposed in the UI. At the moment if you try to add an .ETH name whose “Controller” doesn’t point to Status wallet’s address you just get “Username doesn’t belong to you” error, which is anything but clear.
Moreover How to reclaim your existing ENS name article says You must have the seed phrase for the wallet that owns the name and describes related steps which are not really needed.
[iOS] Furthermore if you follow steps mentioned in the article you create a profile NOT being able to add new accounts: if you try it just stucks without showing any error. I think I gave enough info to reproduce this issue, but if you need more info feel free to ask.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 0 minutes after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.