Typed-data payment requests are crossing a boundary built for transaction methods.
Existing developer compatibility protects active integrations, while explicit authorization protects wallet spending limits.
Who you’d be doing this for
“Our limit blocked the transfer, then the payment request still got signed and my security lead asked why.”
Halima Kosgei · Blockchain Application Developer
Builds an agent-led payment application using embedded wallets and delegated signing.
What is at stake
Typed-data payment requests can be signed outside the spending limits developers expected to apply. You must weigh a durable policy boundary against disruption to active wallet integrations.
Why it isn’t already fixed
Every obvious fix costs something else. That’s the part you’d have to decide.
- policy enforcement vs. active integration continuity
- fail-closed security vs. signing availability
- audit evidence vs. rapid containment
- API stability vs. authorization consistency
Why Stripe
Privy wallet APIs sit between embedded application flows and secure transaction signing, so a policy gap reaches every developer relying on those controls.
Written with these in mind
Not your kind of problem? 88 more at Stripe, or browse every organization.
This is the setup. The work is inside.
Running it puts you in the room: the full situation and its constraints, stakeholders who push back in their own words, and the decisions that are yours to make. What you produce becomes a Day One Plan — work you can show someone instead of describing.