Unified ledger app for substrate-based parachains

Hello, dear Polkadot community.

In the discussion of the ecosystem growth points I’ve mentioned one possible solution to creating a unified ledger app (please refer to the original post for the details) which would give hardware wallet users an ability to work with multiple parachains from within one app.

We’ve developed a proof of concept and the demonstration of such a solution. There is a documented example of running an app demo which involves transactions in Equilibrium, Bifrost, and Khala parachains all working from one app.

If you want your parachain included and the app to display the name of your parachain instead of the genesis hash, add a PR to the repo with following modifications:

  1. Network name: app-substrate-common/substrate_strings.h at 17cd418ef36419a24741d374280cecdcee29e5ef · eq-lab/app-substrate-common · GitHub
  2. Genesis hash: app-substrate-common/substrate_types_common.c at 17cd418ef36419a24741d374280cecdcee29e5ef · eq-lab/app-substrate-common · GitHub
  3. “else if” with the genesis hash: app-substrate-common/substrate_types_common.c at 17cd418ef36419a24741d374280cecdcee29e5ef · eq-lab/app-substrate-common · GitHub

Further plans:

  1. Gather PRs.
  2. Update the App, include all willing parachains.
  3. Perform code audit.
  4. Apply for Ledger Live listing.

I don’t know why this hasn’t gotten more attention and spawned more discussion, but I can very confidently say that a lot of users in the ecosystem are frustrated by the lack of ledger support for various parachains, so teams should at the very least look into the viability of this solution.

1 Like

this is absolutely needed and should be supported by the whole ecosystem with priority :100:


Yeah I agree. We need a proper solution for Ledger. There are already tx version breaking change in Substrate in past few weeks and leader application is a big blocker for moving forward. Parachain cannot upgrade to new tx version without waiting for new ledger version and no one knows how long that will take.

1 Like

Have you been in contact with Ledger? I don’t think they allow blind signing for apps on their store beside for Ethereum. While I agree it’s annoying, blind signing is IMHO a very bad practice that should be avoided at all costs. Also if not going through the Ledger app, you’ll be asking users to install an app that hasn’t been audited by Ledger. This is yet another attack vector. As I wrote elsewhere, blind signing is the problem, not the solution.

Beside Parity Signer, I think we should promote QR code based HW wallet such as Keystone or Kampela (not sure where this went), or any kind of HW wallet that is flexible enough to support Substrate fast changes.

edit: Relying on a hot wallet to review transactions is a de-facto bad idea, whether the private key is accessible or not. History shows it NXM Hack Update. This post will be updated as and when… | by Hugh Karp | Medium


Personally, I perfer the parity-signer. It’s a great cold wallet for most users. looking forward to the next version for many new features. dotsama eco should promote the spread of both ledger and parity-signer. and blind signing is terrible.

1 Like

I’ve heard nothing but good things about Parity Signer, but the fact remains that Ledgers are used by millions of people, and most people don’t want to have to use a second hardware device just for Polkadot (I admit that I’m one of them).

If there is no solution to making Ledger integration smooth and timely, that’s a big blow to adoption, I’m sorry to say.


Fully support the initiative. I’ve left some comments in the Zondax discussion thread.

1 Like

Perfect, great initiative. We are creating a PR straight away here in Mangata :muscle::tada: