Skip to content

Conversation

stackman27
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@stackman27 stackman27 requested a review from a team as a code owner August 19, 2025 21:07
Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Aug 19, 2025

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: ef65c94

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Name Type
chainlink-deployments-framework Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

Copy link

👋 stackman27, thanks for creating this pull request!

To help reviewers, please consider creating future PRs as drafts first. This allows you to self-review and make any final changes before notifying the team.

Once you're ready, you can mark it as "Ready for review" to request feedback. Thanks!

Copy link
Collaborator

@graham-chainlink graham-chainlink left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

any reason why we want to hardcode the faucet port? It was originally introduced due to test flakiness where the same port maybe already taken, using freeport allowed us to allocate a port that is not used.

Alterntive, if you want to use that port, we could expose on the config to allow user to specify the port they need instead.


// PrivateKey returns the underlying ed25519.PrivateKey (64 bytes = seed||pubkey)
// from a SuiSigner created in this package.
func PrivateKey(s SuiSigner) (ed25519.PrivateKey, error) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this something we want to make public? This means anyone with access to Signer can retrieve the private key which increases the surface area for it to be leaked.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

hmm any opposition in just retrieving the signer, i need it in the format that blockvision returns

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

hmm but seems like the signer has the PriKey as exported , which may be an issue if we return the signer, any alternative like performing the signing here instead of passing the private key out?

}

// GetSigner returns the signer in blockVision signer.Signer interface format
func GetSigner(s SuiSigner) (*signer.Signer, error) {
Copy link
Collaborator

@graham-chainlink graham-chainlink Sep 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

just raising that returning the signer here exposes the private key which is not something we should do.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

we should look at why we need to have the signer and what we do with it, then see if we can push that behaviour over to the signer instead

@graham-chainlink graham-chainlink dismissed their stale review September 10, 2025 01:50

pending a comment

@cl-sonarqube-production
Copy link

@stackman27 stackman27 added this pull request to the merge queue Sep 10, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit 42dc440 Sep 10, 2025
14 checks passed
@stackman27 stackman27 deleted the sish/sui-fixes branch September 10, 2025 03:11
github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 10, 2025
This PR was opened by the [Changesets
release](https://github.com/changesets/action) GitHub action. When
you're ready to do a release, you can merge this and the packages will
be published to npm automatically. If you're not ready to do a release
yet, that's fine, whenever you add more changesets to main, this PR will
be updated.


# Releases
## [email protected]

### Patch Changes

-
[#292](#292)
[`42dc440`](42dc440)
Thanks [@stackman27](https://github.com/stackman27)! - fixes for sui
provider

---------

Co-authored-by: app-token-issuer-engops[bot] <144731339+app-token-issuer-engops[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants