EIP-4844 signing support

[mskrzypkows]

I want to add EIP-4844 support. This signs now, but I have some mismatch of the from address when I do send_raw_transaction of the signed transaction (the nonce is not correct that's why I guess the address is wrong). Do you have some suggestions what's missing?

---

Note

Adds EIP-4844 blob transaction signing (params, creation, serialization) with tests, and upgrades web3j to 5.0.1.

• ETH transactions (EIP-4844 support):
  • Extend EthSendTransactionJsonParameters with maxFeePerBlobGas, blobVersionedHashes, and blobs (+ setters/getters).
  • Detect isEip4844() in EthTransaction; build 4844 transactions from raw blobs or blobVersionedHashes (via web3j RawTransaction.createTransaction), with logging.
  • Update Transaction interface to include isEip4844().
  • Add 4844 serialization in TransactionSerializer (type prefixing and signing flow).
  • Tests: parsing, signing, and RLP encoding for EIP-4844 added/updated in EthSendTransactionJsonParametersTest, EthSignTransactionResultProviderTest, and EthTransactionTest.
• Dependencies:
  • Upgrade org.web3j to 5.0.1.
• Changelog:
  • Note EIP-4844 signing support and web3j upgrade.

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit 7d1a14b. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

[github-actions]

All contributors have signed the CLA ✍️ ✅
_{Posted by the CLA Assistant Lite bot.}

[mskrzypkows]

I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA

[mskrzypkows]

I'm still waiting for the web3j PR to be merged (LFDT-web3j/web3j#2196), but could you please check if I've missed anything in this PR? Tests have been added.

[alexghr]

Hello, we're adding support for Web3Signer to the Aztec node and would like to be able to sign EIP-4844 txs through its API. Any chance someone could take a look at this PR?

Thanks :)

[usmansaleem]

@alexghr @mskrzypkows I've started reviewing it, will update here (and on Discord). Most likely, I will create a patch for @mskrzypkows to apply on his PR.

[usmansaleem]

@mskrzypkows LFDT-web3j/web3j#2196 seems to be approved, I am not sure when it will be merged.

[usmansaleem]

@mskrzypkows do you have a failing test case for mismatched "from'?

[mskrzypkows]

@mskrzypkows do you have a failing test case for mismatched "from'?

@usmansaleem What do you mean? Mismatched after recovering from from the signature?

[usmansaleem]

@mskrzypkows Yes, the PR description mentions that "from" is mismatch, how can I reproduce this behaviour?

[mskrzypkows]

Ah, the description is outdated. So the wrong from was caused by the bug which discovered in web3j. If you use my PR without the web3j improvement, you should have wrong signed result. With modified web3j it should be correct.

[mskrzypkows]

The web3j PR has been merged. There is no release yet, while waiting for it, I have added a snapshot version so it can be tested easier.

[mskrzypkows]

@usmansaleem fixed, web3j 5.0.1 has been released, added usage of new version.

[usmansaleem]

@mskrzypkows Can you add a changelog entry please (in CHANGELOG.md file).

[mskrzypkows]

@usmansaleem updated

[alexghr]

Any updates on this? I'm wondering if this PR will have to be updated to support the post-Fusaka blob format (using cell proofs instead of blob proofs). The new format requires a new byte 0x01 to be inserted between the tx body and the blobs

https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-7594#networking

[Gabriel-Trintinalia]

#1103