Add EIP: Migration Transaction #7377

lightclient · 2023-07-22T13:52:49Z

This EIP proposes a new transaction type that allows EOAs to submit a one-time upgrade to a smart contract.

eth-bot · 2023-07-22T13:53:18Z

File `EIPS/eip-7377.md`

Requires 1 more reviewers from @axic, @g11tech, @gcolvin, @Pandapip1, @SamWilsn

EIPS/eip-7377.md

Pandapip1 · 2023-07-22T15:44:19Z

EIPS/eip-7377.md

+
+### Cheaper storage
+
+Sometimes it's better to lead with a carrot instead of a stick.


Suggested change

Sometimes it's better to lead with a carrot instead of a stick.

Cheaper storage incentivizes users to migrate, while maintaining the storage cost means that there is more friction to the migration process. Additionally, since mass adoption of contract wallets is a positive externality, a storage subsidy makes sense.

Should probably use more formal language here.

That's no fun though

Okay. You can have your fun. As long as you follow it up with a formal explanation.

Suggested change

Sometimes it's better to lead with a carrot instead of a stick.

Sometimes it's better to lead with a carrot instead of a stick.

Cheaper storage incentivizes users to migrate, while maintaining the storage cost means that there is more friction to the migration process. Additionally, since mass adoption of contract wallets is a positive externality, a storage subsidy makes sense.

I will be blocking this EIP until a formal explanation for this is added.

EIPS/eip-7377.md

lightclient · 2023-07-22T16:40:24Z

thanks for the feedback @Pandapip1, ready for review again

EIPS/eip-7377.md

Pandapip1 · 2023-07-23T04:57:27Z

EIPS/eip-7377.md

+
+## Security Considerations
+
+As with all sufficiently sophisticated account designs, if a user can be convinced to sign an arbitrary message, that message could be MigrationTransaction which is owned by a malicious actor instead of the user. This can generally be avoided if wallets treat these transactions with *extreme* care and create as much friction and verification as possible before completing the signature.


What is important? If you're talking about the "reasonable amount of friction" bit, I would be fine if that part is unchanged:

Suggested change

As with all sufficiently sophisticated account designs, if a user can be convinced to sign an arbitrary message, that message could be MigrationTransaction which is owned by a malicious actor instead of the user. This can generally be avoided if wallets treat these transactions with *extreme* care and create as much friction and verification as possible before completing the signature.

If a user can be convinced to sign an arbitrary message by a malicious actor, that message could now set the account code of the victim. This can generally be avoided if wallets treat these transactions with *extreme* care and create as much friction and verification as possible before completing the signature.

I would still argue "as much friction as possible" is NOT what you mean here - this is an EIP, and so hyperbole should not be used.

EIPS/eip-7377.md

Pandapip1 · 2023-07-23T05:02:28Z

EIPS/eip-7377.md

+
+### Cheaper storage
+
+Sometimes it's better to lead with a carrot instead of a stick.


Okay. You can have your fun. As long as you follow it up with a formal explanation.

Suggested change

Sometimes it's better to lead with a carrot instead of a stick.

Sometimes it's better to lead with a carrot instead of a stick.

Cheaper storage incentivizes users to migrate, while maintaining the storage cost means that there is more friction to the migration process. Additionally, since mass adoption of contract wallets is a positive externality, a storage subsidy makes sense.

lightclient · 2023-07-23T14:43:49Z

@Pandapip1 the PR meets the criteria for draft so I would like to ask that you approve it.

Co-authored-by: Gavin John <[email protected]>

Pandapip1 · 2023-07-24T16:20:16Z

EIPS/eip-7377.md

+
+### No `to` address field
+
+This transaction is only good for one time use to migrate an EOA to a smart contract. It is designed to immediately call the deployed contract, which is at the sender's address, after deployment to allow the sender to do any kind of further processing.


The first sentence is grammatically incorrect and the phrasing is wrong. I think that what you mean is that "This transaction is designed to perform a one-time migration from an EOA to a smart contrct." It's not "only good" for migration - it's its explicit goal.

Additionally, the second sentence has misplaced commas and the structure makes it hard to read.

Pandapip1 · 2023-07-24T16:20:45Z

EIPS/eip-7377.md

+
+### Cheaper storage
+
+Sometimes it's better to lead with a carrot instead of a stick.


I will be blocking this EIP until a formal explanation for this is added.

Pandapip1 · 2023-07-24T16:23:05Z

EIPS/eip-7377.md

+
+## Security Considerations
+
+As with all sufficiently sophisticated account designs, if a user can be convinced to sign an arbitrary message, that message could be MigrationTransaction which is owned by a malicious actor instead of the user. This can generally be avoided if wallets treat these transactions with *extreme* care and create as much friction and verification as possible before completing the signature.


Why is that an important part of the statement? Isn't a "sufficiently sophisticated account design" implied by a "sign an arbitrary message"?

lightclient · 2023-07-24T17:27:08Z

@Pandapip1 the formatting is correct. There is nothing in EIP-1 that says you can block merging a well-formatted draft because an explanation isn't formal enough. I again ask that you merge this to draft. I want to share this with the community, but you are delaying it.

EIPS/eip-7377.md

lightclient · 2023-07-24T19:27:35Z

@g11tech, wrote a new motivation, PTAL

Pandapip1 · 2023-07-25T16:57:47Z

@Pandapip1 the formatting is correct. There is nothing in EIP-1 that says you can block merging a well-formatted draft because an explanation isn't formal enough. I again ask that you merge this to draft. I want to share this with the community, but you are delaying it.

Quoting EIP-1:

EIP Editor Responsibilities

For each new EIP that comes in, an editor does the following:

Read the EIP to check if it is ready: sound and complete. The ideas must make technical sense, even if they don’t seem likely to get to final status.

The title should accurately describe the content.

Check the EIP for language (spelling, grammar, sentence structure, etc.), markup (GitHub flavored Markdown), code style

If the EIP isn’t ready, the editor will send it back to the author for revision, with specific instructions.

The majority of my complaints fall under the third option. In fact, sentence structure is explicitly called out as something that I can block an EIP for.

Additionally, my requiring of adding a formal explanation for your "lead with a carrot, not a stick" falls squarely under the first option, since I am blocking the EIP for not containing a sound and complete explanation for that particular section.

I don't want to delay merging your EIP any longer than need be. Either accept my changes, or fix them yourself. But I will not be merging this EIP until you do. Since you are an editor yourself, I will be holding you to a higher standard of quality here.

lightclient · 2023-07-25T17:43:11Z

@Pandapip1 I've added more formal language. I don't agree with your other change requests and they are not reasonable grounds to block on.

* add migration tx eip * add 2718 as requirement * add eip number * placate the supreme ruler, our great overlord, and my friend - eipw * fix duplicate * fix hierarchy * fix hierarchy * markdown lint * rename storage field * Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Gavin John <[email protected]> * more code review suggestions * Nit * Nit 2: Electric Boogaloo * addr instead of ptr * different motivation * remove fun line --------- Co-authored-by: Gavin John <[email protected]>

lightclient requested a review from eth-bot as a code owner July 22, 2023 13:52

github-actions bot added c-new Creates a brand new proposal s-draft This EIP is a Draft t-core labels Jul 22, 2023

eth-bot changed the title ~~Add migration tx eip~~ Add EIP: Migration Transaction Jul 22, 2023

eth-bot added e-consensus Waiting on editor consensus e-review Waiting on editor to review labels Jul 22, 2023

lightclient force-pushed the eip-migration-tx branch from 19ef698 to 5fe81e5 Compare July 22, 2023 13:58

Pandapip1 suggested changes Jul 22, 2023

View reviewed changes

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Sign in to view

lightclient force-pushed the eip-migration-tx branch from 92f20ed to a2132b0 Compare July 22, 2023 16:35

Pandapip1 suggested changes Jul 23, 2023

View reviewed changes

lightclient and others added 13 commits July 24, 2023 07:59

add migration tx eip

62dc306

add 2718 as requirement

58a139a

add eip number

f98ead6

placate the supreme ruler, our great overlord, and my friend - eipw

65fb7ff

fix duplicate

af49d6c

fix hierarchy

0fed596

fix hierarchy

47a6bfe

markdown lint

9ac8f7c

rename storage field

36297d6

Apply suggestions from code review

2278878

Co-authored-by: Gavin John <[email protected]>

more code review suggestions

e79c76c

Nit

78cc8e1

Nit 2: Electric Boogaloo

1c4261f

lightclient force-pushed the eip-migration-tx branch from 6008962 to 1c4261f Compare July 24, 2023 13:59

Pandapip1 suggested changes Jul 24, 2023

View reviewed changes

g11tech reviewed Jul 24, 2023

View reviewed changes

EIPS/eip-7377.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

EIPS/eip-7377.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

EIPS/eip-7377.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

EIPS/eip-7377.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

EIPS/eip-7377.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

addr instead of ptr

30de64d

different motivation

d0765f9

lightclient force-pushed the eip-migration-tx branch from c649042 to d0765f9 Compare July 24, 2023 19:33

remove fun line

76a119d

lightclient merged commit 7e5caf1 into ethereum:master Jul 26, 2023

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add EIP: Migration Transaction #7377

Add EIP: Migration Transaction #7377

lightclient commented Jul 22, 2023

eth-bot commented Jul 22, 2023 •

edited

Loading

Pandapip1 Jul 22, 2023

lightclient Jul 22, 2023

Pandapip1 Jul 23, 2023

Pandapip1 Jul 24, 2023

This comment was marked as off-topic.

This comment was marked as off-topic.

lightclient commented Jul 22, 2023

Pandapip1 Jul 23, 2023

Pandapip1 Jul 23, 2023

lightclient commented Jul 23, 2023

Pandapip1 Jul 24, 2023

Pandapip1 Jul 24, 2023

Pandapip1 Jul 24, 2023

lightclient commented Jul 24, 2023

lightclient commented Jul 24, 2023

Pandapip1 commented Jul 25, 2023 •

edited

Loading

EIP Editor Responsibilities

lightclient commented Jul 25, 2023


		### Cheaper storage

		Sometimes it's better to lead with a carrot instead of a stick.

	Sometimes it's better to lead with a carrot instead of a stick.
	Cheaper storage incentivizes users to migrate, while maintaining the storage cost means that there is more friction to the migration process. Additionally, since mass adoption of contract wallets is a positive externality, a storage subsidy makes sense.


		## Security Considerations

		As with all sufficiently sophisticated account designs, if a user can be convinced to sign an arbitrary message, that message could be MigrationTransaction which is owned by a malicious actor instead of the user. This can generally be avoided if wallets treat these transactions with extreme care and create as much friction and verification as possible before completing the signature.

	As with all sufficiently sophisticated account designs, if a user can be convinced to sign an arbitrary message, that message could be MigrationTransaction which is owned by a malicious actor instead of the user. This can generally be avoided if wallets treat these transactions with extreme care and create as much friction and verification as possible before completing the signature.
	If a user can be convinced to sign an arbitrary message by a malicious actor, that message could now set the account code of the victim. This can generally be avoided if wallets treat these transactions with extreme care and create as much friction and verification as possible before completing the signature.


		### No `to` address field

		This transaction is only good for one time use to migrate an EOA to a smart contract. It is designed to immediately call the deployed contract, which is at the sender's address, after deployment to allow the sender to do any kind of further processing.

Add EIP: Migration Transaction #7377

Add EIP: Migration Transaction #7377

Conversation

lightclient commented Jul 22, 2023

eth-bot commented Jul 22, 2023 • edited Loading

File EIPS/eip-7377.md

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

This comment was marked as off-topic.

This comment was marked as off-topic.

lightclient commented Jul 22, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lightclient commented Jul 23, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lightclient commented Jul 24, 2023

lightclient commented Jul 24, 2023

Pandapip1 commented Jul 25, 2023 • edited Loading

EIP Editor Responsibilities

lightclient commented Jul 25, 2023

eth-bot commented Jul 22, 2023 •

edited

Loading

File `EIPS/eip-7377.md`

Pandapip1 commented Jul 25, 2023 •

edited

Loading