As I understand when using web3.eth.accounts.create(), it doesn't add the account to chain (I'm using ganache-cli for testing), but web3.eth.personal.newAccount() does.
Is it the main purpose or is it a bug?
Is there other differences?
web3.js version: 1.0.0-beta.34
Both versions create a new account on the blockchain. The difference is how you interact with the node and having access to the private key. If you have a local node, you can use web3.eth.accounts.create which will create the account and provide you access to the private key generate so it can be stored locally. However, since returning the private key over a connection isn’t secure, you should never use this approach to create an account if you connect through a provider like Infura.
On the other hand, you can use web3.eth.personal to create a new account on a remote node. In this case, the private key will not be returned to you, so you lose some flexibility with accessing your account. When you don’t have the private key, you can’t sign transactions locally. In order to run transactions, you have to call unlockAccount on the remote node. Note that you have to send your password to create/unlock your account using web3.eth.personal, so you still need to make sure you using a secure connection.
Review this Medium blog post for additional info.
Related
On the ethers documentation, it says that the two most commons signers are:
Wallet, which is a class which knows its private key and can execute any operations with it.
JsonRpcSigner, which is connected to a JsonRpcProvider (or sub-class) and is acquired using getSigner
What I'm having trouble understanding is how a JsonRpcSigner is created when the provider is a web3provider (i.e., MetaMask). Doesn't a web3provider know its private key and should therefore return a Wallet when provider.getSigner() is run?
The Wallet singer is used when your ethers.js instance knows the private key directly.
Since MetaMask doesn't share the key with other applications, ethers.js uses the JsonRpcSigner to be able to request the local MetaMask instance over its API to sign the transaction when needed, and then receive the signed transaction back, without ethers.js ever knowing the key.
I think the Wallet subclass of abstract signer has both the sign and signMessage methods, but JsonRpcSigner (what you get from provider.getSigner()) does not. The use case is I'm trying to sign a transaction using sign from metamask for instance and then submit it later.
When configuring and installing an EOS blockchain, you're required to use the "eosio" account as the block producing account or blocks aren't signed. I haven't been able to find much info. however about this pseudo account as it appears to come w/the software by default.
From EOSIO documentation, the "eosio" account is an authorizing account, used to bootstrap EOSIO nodes. But is it stored someplace, or just the default "root" account for EOS blockchains?
You even use this account to create new accounts.
My question is, where is its private key? Is this the key set in the genesis.json file? Can I use another account to configure my blockchain? I would imagine so b/c you specify it at the cmd. line, otherwise the parameter wouldn't be needed.
I'm just frustrated by the lack of documentation surrounding EOS and kindly request help from the community.
UPDATE: 7/13/2018
I changed the "producer-name" to another value but then the blockchain doesn't sign transactions and it sits idle. This is why I'm confused about "eosio." Its key is configured in the config.ini but it doesn't appear that you can change the "producer-name," which is fine, but then why have a "-p" cmd. line parameter? It's just not making sense to me.
its private key is stored at config.ini
# Tuple of [public key, WIF private key] (may specify multiple times) (eosio::producer_plugin)
private-key = ["EOS6MRyAjQq8ud7hVNYcfnVPJqcVpscN5So8BhtHuGYqET5GDW5CV","5KQwrPbwdL6PhXujxW37FSSQZ1JiwsST4cqQzDeyXtP79zkvFD3"]
The second value is the private key.
In addition I think that you can use another account to configure your blockchain . EOSIO is just the testing account .
So i suppose that you can use another block producer if you use another producer name and account with different keys at config.ini
Check this : https://medium.com/coinmonks/test-4fbd38fdc4e8 chapter 4
I'm developing a ethereum dapp that can automatically generate new accounts (wallet addresses) for users immediately after a registration button is clicked.
It's pretty complicated for me since I'm a newbie in dapp development. Any solution on how to achieve this will highly be appreciated. I also have a Php script downloaded from GitHub link though it could be handy for account generation since I'm using PHP as a back-end but still confused on how to use the script.
Requesting help on using the ethereum-PHP script for account generation will also be appreciated. Thanks
Your question is quite broad, but you should be able to do what you wish by using either Geth or Parity. Personally, I prefer Parity. They have good documentation and their API is easy to use.
Parity.io
If youre using web3 in front end you could simply use web3.eth.accounts.create(<key>); and save it on front end.
If youre using Metamask it has their own way of handling account creation out of the box.
You could use the personal.newAccount() in php-ethereum but in that case youre generating the private key at the server end which could be a possible.
you need to use web3 for this task. In your sigup/register function file import web3 and connect it with you network. after that you can call two methods of web3 library.
one is web3.eth.personal.newAccount('password'): this function will generate account with keystore file . keystore file will be stored on network file directory.
second one is web3.eth.accounts.create(): this method will generate new account with private key of account which you can use to perform task on network .
I'm building an application that stores files into the FIWARE Object Storage. I don't quite understand what is the correct way of storing files into the storage.
The code python code snippet below taken from the Object Storage - User and Programmers Guide shows 2 ways of doing it:
def store_text(token, auth, container_name, object_name, object_text):
headers = {"X-Auth-Token": token}
# 1. version
#body = '{"mimetype":"text/plain", "metadata":{}, "value" : "' + object_text + '"}'
# 2. version
body = object_text
url = auth + "/" + container_name + "/" + object_name
return swift_request('PUT', url, headers, body)
The 1. version confuses me, because when I first looked at the only Node.js module (repo: fiware-object-storage) that works with Object Storage, it seemed to use 1. version. As the module was making calls to the old (v.1.1) API version instead of the presumably newest (v.2.0), referencing to the python example, not sure if that is an outdated version of doing it or not.
As I played more with the module, realised it didn't work and the code for it was a total mess. So I forked the project and quickly understood that I will need rewrite it form the ground up, taking the above mention python example from the usage guide as an reference. Link to my repo.
As of writing this the only methods that aren't implement is the object storage (PUT) and object fetching (GET).
Had some addition questions about the Object Storage which I sent to fiware-lab-help#lists.fiware.org, but haven't heard anything back so asking them here.
Haven't got much experience with writing API libraries. Should I need to worry about auth token expiring? I presume it is not needed to make a new authentication, every time we interact with storage. The authentication should happen once when server is starting-up (we create a instance) and it internally keeps it. Should I implement some kind of mechanism that refreshes the token?
Does the tenant id change? From the quote below is presume that getting a tenant I just a one time deal, then later you can use it in the config to make less authentication calls.
A valid token is required to access an object store. This section
describes how to get a valid token assuming an identity management
system compatible with OpenStack Keystone is being used. If the
username, password and tenant details are known, only step 3 is
required. source
During the authentication when fetching tenants how should I select the "right" one? For now i'm just taking the first one similar as the example code does.
Is it true that a object storage container belongs to only a single region?
Use only what you call version 2. Ignore your version 1. It is commented out in the example. It should be removed from the documentation.
(1) The token will be valid for some period of time. This could be an hour or a day, depending on the setup. This period of time should be specified in the token that is returned by the authentication service. The token needs to be periodically refreshed.
(2) The tenant id does not change.
(3) Typically only one tenant id is returned. It is possible, however, that you were assigned more than one id, in which case you have to pick which one you are currently using. Containers typically belong to a single tenant and are not shared between tenants.
(4) Containers are typically limited to a single region. This may change in the future when multi-region support for a container is added to Swift.
Solved my troubles and created the NPM module that works with the FIWARE Object Storage: https://github.com/renarsvilnis/fiware-object-storage-ge
First Project: Spring3, Security3, Hibernate, MYSQL - How to install user tracking into database
I am working on my first project with Spring3, Security3, Hibernate, MYSQL.
I have the system working great I use Spring3 and Security3 goign to MySQL for the login and
using Spring3 MVC, Hibernate and MYSQL for system data.
I have a number of questions. Once I login does Spring Security save the user object somewhere that I can have
Hibrernate access it. I want Hibernate to put the user name or role into each insert to the database so as
I do my searches the system knows to only show data for that user and only that user?
this somes like it should be easy. Spring should be saving the user somewhere the hibernate can access.
please help me out
Once the user is authenticated, you can access the user's authentication session details:
Authentication authentication = SecurityContextHolder.getContext().getAuthentication();
SecurityContext will allow you to grab the Authentication object, and from that you can retrieve the principal (an object representing the authenticated user), roles, etc. You could inspect this information and determine what data should be stored/displayed for each user.
If you can add a request filter or interceptor (the vocabulary may vary between frameworks), you could probably make these security checks abstract/generic enough to be applied across your entire web app (instead of adding a few lines of code to every resource method you're attempting to secure). Either way, SecurityContext should get you closer to what you want.