Connecting Bitcoin wallets to dApps: Wallet Connect

[GiMa-Maya]

Hey all,

I’m GiMa, business developer for Maya Protocol. Maya Protocol provides swaps between native assets in a decentralised way (BTC<>ETH for example) and a Savers vault to earn yield on your single side staked native BTC.
It is in Maya’s best interest to make it easy for wallets to connect their Bitcoin wallets to dApps. Right now, there isn’t really an universal way to do so.

I think many people here are familiar with Wallet Connect. Wallet Connect allows EVM’s, Cosmos chains and more to connect with dApps. Wallet Connect is used in almost all wallets. We’re now looking to add Dash to Wallet Connect since we will be integrating Dash as a new chain very soon.
We’re talking with the Wallet Connect team about this, and I think it would be awesome to develop this at the same time for Bitcoin as well.

I was wondering wether any steps have already been taken to do this in the past, or wether people are interested in developing this.

Looking forward to your replies!

GiMa

[blockman]

Hi Gima,
I just have a question since I am from the Philippines and we've got also a wallet named Maya now which was changed before its name was PayMaya.
Are you by any chance connected or you're the actual Maya that represented on this forum? Or you're just the same name as them because they're also an e-wallet with supported crypto wallets as well.

[GiMa-Maya]

Hey Blockman,
Maya Protocol is not associated with the Maya wallet you’re talking about

[Yogee]

Wouldn't it be nice if you could post a link to your platform in your post or is your newbie rank preventing you from doing so?

By connecting bitcoin wallet also means they have to pay more transaction fees when interacting with various dapps right? I mean Maya or Wallet Connect would also take some commissions. I personally doubt people are interested in using their btc on a regular basis for that purpose. Many have opted for L2 solutions instead of using Ethereum network due to insane fees so I think the case will be the same here.

[vv181]

I doubt most popular bitcoin wallets would want to integrate Wallet Connect into their application. The use cases are none and only required specifically only for your protocol. Since integrating Wallet Connect requires the wallet to cooperate, your best bet is to fork some bitcoin wallets only to implement the Wallet Connect protocol.

Besides, what's the matter with a method like Ren Bridge? I was once swapping Bitcoin into Polygon tokens, and it is convenient at best without requiring me to connect the wallet. I just can't think of what any other use cases specifically for Bitcoin, since it is a limited factor.

[GiMa-Maya]

@Yogee, Maya Protocol is a fork of THORChain. So we do swaps between native unwrapped assets. We don’t have an dApps ourselves, but front ends can choose to integrate our crosschain swaps and Savers feature.
About the fees, no, you would only pay the Bitcoin network fees. Wallet Connect does not take commissions. Maya only has slippage fees, which it pays to its Liquidity Providers, providing native and unwrapped BTC, ETH, etc. Maya and THORChain are there to replace Centralised Exchanges.
Maya Website
https://www.mayaprotocol.com/
Front ends:
https://www.eldorado.market/
https://app.thorswap.finance/swap/BTC.BTC_LTC.LTC
https://app.thorwallet.org/swap

However I’m not here to promote the project, I’m here to advocate for brining native BTC to Wallet Connect. I think with the current and future uses cases, it would be good for bitcoin to have a better availability to be able to connect with dApps. I hope that people are interested in this


@vv181 Right now the usecases are Decentralised crosschain swapping, saving (earning native yield on your BTC) and soon also lending. In order to become decentralised, also Wallets need to join this movement.
We know that there is demand from Multichain wallets, such as Trustwallet, Exodus, MathWallet and more. So that really is not the problem.

About Ren Bridge… It’s still a wrapped version of Bitcoin. Wrapping tokens is risky and not safe. A perfect example of that is RenBTC actually. It does not exist anymore.

[fzkto]

I am not in favour of Bitcoin becoming something like ETH or ATOM. Bitcoin is not designed for tokens or NFTs. It has a small bandwidth. With the advent of BRC20 transaction fees have increased many times over. If this continues and you can connect to various dapps, which as I said are not conceived in the bitcoin blockchain, problems could start to occur with the network.

[vv181]

@vv181 Right now the usecases are Decentralised crosschain swapping, saving (earning native yield on your BTC) and soon also lending. In order to become decentralised, also Wallets need to join this movement.

Why would decentralization rely upon wallet adoption or integration? You should be concerned about your own protocol since surely it is completely unmatchable with Bitcoin decentralization robustness.

And about saving, I don't consider it as a native yield, your protocol governs and custody the BTC that is being held, in consequence, the user got synthetic assets right? And this asset is on the other chain.

About Ren Bridge… It’s still a wrapped version of Bitcoin. Wrapping tokens is risky and not safe. A perfect example of that is RenBTC actually. It does not exist anymore.

I'm talking about the conveniences of the cross-chain bridge. Anyway, what would its wrapped collateralization be any better than the Maya Protocol of synthetic assets?


The most concerning thing is about decentralization, why would Bitcoin users reduce and gave away their complete ownership in this kind of protocol?

[huu78]

I doubt most popular bitcoin wallets would want to integrate Wallet Connect into their application. The use cases are none and only required specifically only for your protocol. Since integrating Wallet Connect requires the wallet to cooperate, your best bet is to fork some bitcoin wallets only to implement the Wallet Connect protocol.

Besides, what's the matter with a method like Ren Bridge? I was once swapping Bitcoin into Polygon tokens, and it is convenient at best without requiring me to connect the wallet. I just can't think of what any other use cases specifically for Bitcoin, since it is a limited factor.

While it's true that not all popular Bitcoin wallets may choose to integrate WalletConnect or other similar protocols, it's important to note that integration decisions are based on various factors such as user demand, security considerations, and the overall goals of the wallet provider. WalletConnect and similar protocols aim to provide interoperability between wallets and decentralized applications (DApps) by establishing a secure communication channel.

[blockman]

Hey Blockman,
Maya Protocol is not associated with the Maya wallet you’re talking about

Thanks.

However I’m not here to promote the project, I’m here to advocate for brining native BTC to Wallet Connect. I think with the current and future uses cases, it would be good for bitcoin to have a better availability to be able to connect with dApps. I hope that people are interested in this

Sure, there are many people that are interested in it. But with the fees thanks to the BRC20 tokens, this is also gonna bring up some high fees if ever the demand is asking it. The matter is, Bitcoin is stand alone and doesn't need of these but as most projects are integrating with other chains and as you've said making those wrapped versions, I guess it's only good for those.

[Bitstar_coin]

I am not in favour of Bitcoin becoming something like ETH or ATOM. Bitcoin is not designed for tokens or NFTs. It has a small bandwidth. With the advent of BRC20 transaction fees have increased many times over. If this continues and you can connect to various dapps, which as I said are not conceived in the bitcoin blockchain, problems could start to occur with the network.

The problem already started especially with transaction fees, today I bought few btc sats I wanted to withdraw to my personal wallet from exchange and the fees was mind blowing, couldn't believe it. The brc20 movement is taking the btc blockchain by storm and things will get even worse as this is just the beginning of a shit load of brc20 projects popping out.

[GiMa-Maya]

@vv181, Maya does not use synthetics for crosschain swapping. Maya only uses native assets for swapping. When you swap BTC to ETH, you send BTC to a wallet secured by TTS. The Mayachain observes blockchains of all integrated blockchains. When a transaction is send to Maya’s BTC wallet, the chain observes it along with the op return/memo  (that contains the data on which asset to swap to, to which wallet and some more things). Once all security measures have succeeded, Maya’s ETH wallet sends the ETH to the user’s Ethereum addresd.
It only uses these Synthetics for the Savers function. It is basically single sided staking (no exposure to CACAO, the asset used for dual lp’ing).
Why is this safer? Maya deals with native assets, not wrapped assets backed by non existing coins or smart contracts.

BTC users that dual LP their native bitcoin, or put their native BTC in a Savers vault, earn BTC as yield. More lucrative than just holding BTC in your wallet.

These wallets I mentioned, that hold the BTC liquidity, are in a TSS secured by many nodes (goal is 120). A node operator always bonds more than they can get by stealing assets. Also, users can withdraw funds at any time.


About Wallet Connect, there is demand for it from wallets. We’re going to explore these possibilities. Will keep you up to date on this!

About the fees, I agree, it could increase the fees. I’m against Brc20’s and ordinals and all new things that are happening. The Bitcoin chain was only made for BTC.

However I still see the need for getting decentralised exchanges, lending protocols and more. Today, Binance announced that it will be delisting Dash, Monero, Zcash and more privacy coins in some countries in Europe. This could happen to BTC too. At that moment, Maya, and other cross chain solutions will be there to still provide trading of crypto. Wallet Connect is a huge step for Bitcoin for this.

[vv181]

@vv181, Maya does not use synthetics for crosschain swapping. Maya only uses native assets for swapping. When you swap BTC to ETH, you send BTC to a wallet secured by TTS. The Mayachain observes blockchains of all integrated blockchains. When a transaction is send to Maya’s BTC wallet, the chain observes it along with the op return/memo  (that contains the data on which asset to swap to, to which wallet and some more things). Once all security measures have succeeded, Maya’s ETH wallet sends the ETH to the user’s Ethereum addresd.
It only uses these Synthetics for the Savers function. It is basically single sided staking (no exposure to CACAO, the asset used for dual lp’ing).
Why is this safer? Maya deals with native assets, not wrapped assets backed by non existing coins or smart contracts.

BTC users that dual LP their native bitcoin, or put their native BTC in a Savers vault, earn BTC as yield. More lucrative than just holding BTC in your wallet.

I did not say the swap is using synthetic assets, but the saving/savers function. I generally know how the platforms work, and since you iterate it again, as I have said it can't be said to earn the bitcoin natively.

Lucrative is also an over-promising word. Bitcoin that is owned on the non-custody user wallet absolutely way safer than the one on your protocol. I bet the rewards are not worth the risk. There will be smart contract risks and decentralization risks on your side.