pull down to refresh

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @ek 3h \ parent \ on: SN resolves to go noncustodial on Jan. 3rd - FAQ & AMA
it's likely this behavior will be re-worked in the future
Do you have suggestions? I think this is a limitation of how NWC is generally used since we don't want to store spending permissions on our server.1 So afaict, we need two separate connections since one needs to be on your device or encrypted on the server and one needs to be in plaintext on the server.
I think all we can do is to explain this better but wallets will continue to have to provide two different strings unless the spec is updated in some way. 🤔

Footnotes

  1. and nobody should if they want to claim they are non-custodial ↩
write
preview
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b OP 1h
I think the solution is to separate send/receive into independent steps as we've discussed.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 1h
ah yes, independent steps can explain it better but we will still need two different NWC strings so I was replying to the "for now" in
but for now, you need TWO DIFFERENT NWC STRINGS.
reply
11 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b OP 1h
I guess we can add an explainer in the short term.
Why do we need two separate stings? XYZ app lets me use just one.
We don't ever store spending permissions on the server. To enable receiving, we need a string without spending permissions for the server. To enable spending, we need one string for that never leaves your browser.
reply