Verifying TransparentUpgradeableProxy on Boba Network

Support Upgrades
, , ,
1

I have used the truffle upgrades plugin to deploy a TransparentUpgradeableProxy on Boba Network. It seems nobody has deployed a contract with matching bytecode before. How can I verify it on Boba BlockScout?

First I tried verifying with Sourcify. Since I'm using the plugin, truffle doesn't create a TransparentUpgradeableProxy.json in my project's build/contracts folder. There is one in node_modules/@openzeppelin/contracts/build/contracts, but it doesn't include the required metadata field and I'm not sure how to construct one.

Then I tried verifying a flattened version. The proxy was deployed with truffle-upgrades 1.11.0. So I flattened TransparentUpgradeableProxy.sol from openzeppelin-contracts v4.1.0 and then submitted for verification specifying solc 0.8.2 and 200 runs for the optimizer. But although the constructor args I submitted appear at the end of the creation transaction I got the error "Constructor arguments do not match". The Boba folks say that flattened contract verification can be "flaky".

constructor args

The implementer's initialize() takes two address parameters, (0x4200000000000000000000000000000000000010,0xef5fa9f3dede72ec306dfff1a7ea0bb0a2f7046f). That function call is encoded as 485cc9550000000000000000000000004200000000000000000000000000000000000010000000000000000000000000ef5fa9f3dede72ec306dfff1a7ea0bb0a2f7046f.

The proxy constructor receives address _logic, address admin_, bytes memory _data. Those are (0x5Ded6742e5f77A92556123C9B26fE965fC6A99e6,0x9f4AbB5998dcf1CCF16323B13Cd1d7Eb099a0b1c,<above function call>).

Encoding as ABI yields 0000000000000000000000005ded6742e5f77a92556123c9b26fe965fc6a99e60000000000000000000000009f4abb5998dcf1ccf16323b13cd1d7eb099a0b1c00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000600000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000044485cc9550000000000000000000000004200000000000000000000000000000000000010000000000000000000000000ef5fa9f3dede72ec306dfff1a7ea0bb0a2f7046f00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000. I think this is right since it matches the end of the contract creation code displayed on BlockScout.

related OZ forum posts

How to verify a contract on Etherscan/BscScan/PolygonScan provides a standard JSON input for verification, but blockscout doesn't accept that format. Verify hardhat upgradeable proxy on blockscout is relevant but there hasn't been a follow-up by anyone who successfully verified.

My last resort will be this kludge. I wish there was a better flow for verifying the plugin's contracts. The time I've spent on this has outweighed what I gain from not just symlinking the contracts and building + deploying myself (though I wouldn't get the plugin's security checks).

2

Hi Gabe, Thank you for a very detailed post.

I'm currently trying to verify the contract on Sourcify.

1 Like
3

It took a while, Sourcify wasn't working well... But I was able to verify it! See on Sourcify.

I followed this tutorial for Hardhat, uploading the build info file with metadata. I had to upgrade Hardhat to 2.6.8 in order to get metadata in the artifact by default. Here is the build info in case someone else finds it useful:

7bb030e0308fc12583739682149c7c44.json (1.9 MB)

1 Like
4

Thanks so much! When I get back to the office I'll follow your steps for the proxy admin if it also needs verification.

1 Like
5

The same build info should allow you to verify the ProxyAdmin.

1 Like
6

HA! I stumbled upon this thread as I was trying to verify that same contract on Rinkeby :smiley:

7

When using the hardhat task to verify I get the following:

yarn run verify --network rinkeby 0xc54f34fcd6a4387ce6cf8d42de0aa1646e95c8e8
Nothing to compile
Error in plugin @nomiclabs/hardhat-etherscan: The constructor for @openzeppelin/contracts/proxy/transparent/TransparentUpgradeableProxy.sol:TransparentUpgradeableProxy has 3 parameters
but 0 arguments were provided instead.

For more info run Hardhat with --show-stack-traces

The challenge is that this contract was deployed by another contract, as part of a transaction that does several other things.

EDIT: I was able to get the right values using Tenderly! Contract is now verified!

2 Likes