#dusk $DUSK @Dusk ....... I usually don't notice tiny wallet commits. This one made me stop: @Dusk changed three lines of bridge behavior because a few invisible characters can matter when a memo is the destination.
The BEP20 bridge uses the memo to tell Dusk which BSC address should receive the DUSK. So in this case, the memo isn't just a note. It's part of the routing instruction.
Think of it like a parcel label.
If the address says:
0xABC...
a human sees the same destination.
Software doesn't always treat the extra spaces and line breaks the same way.
That’s what this commit fixes. For BEP20 bridge transfers, the Web Wallet now creates a normalized memo with whitespace removed, then uses that same cleaned value for validation, the review screen, and the actual transaction.
The interesting part is the test.
Dusk added a case where the EVM address is surrounded by spaces, a newline, and a tab. The wallet must still show the clean address on review and send that exact normalized address to execution.
Small change, but the consequence matters because Dusk's docs warn that a missing or invalid bridge memo can prevent automatic routing and may make a transfer unrecoverable. Users still have to verify the destination address themselves.
I like this kind of engineering because it isn't flashy.
It's the boring edge case that sits between “the code works” and “a user can safely trust the flow.”
How many serious wallet risks are hiding in details that look this small?
$ACE $BOME
The BEP20 bridge uses the memo to tell Dusk which BSC address should receive the DUSK. So in this case, the memo isn't just a note. It's part of the routing instruction.
Think of it like a parcel label.
If the address says:
0xABC...
a human sees the same destination.
Software doesn't always treat the extra spaces and line breaks the same way.
That’s what this commit fixes. For BEP20 bridge transfers, the Web Wallet now creates a normalized memo with whitespace removed, then uses that same cleaned value for validation, the review screen, and the actual transaction.
The interesting part is the test.
Dusk added a case where the EVM address is surrounded by spaces, a newline, and a tab. The wallet must still show the clean address on review and send that exact normalized address to execution.
Small change, but the consequence matters because Dusk's docs warn that a missing or invalid bridge memo can prevent automatic routing and may make a transfer unrecoverable. Users still have to verify the destination address themselves.
I like this kind of engineering because it isn't flashy.
It's the boring edge case that sits between “the code works” and “a user can safely trust the flow.”
How many serious wallet risks are hiding in details that look this small?
$ACE $BOME