A completed signature is being mistaken for a completed XRP Ledger transaction.
The API must preserve a clean signing boundary while giving developers enough evidence to act when broadcast fails.
Who you’d be doing this for
“I’ve got a signature, then nothing lands on-chain and finance asks where the payment went.”
Knut Nilsson · Blockchain Application Developer
Builds an embedded-wallet payment flow that signs XRP Ledger transactions through Privy and broadcasts them from the application.
What is at stake
Failed XRP Ledger broadcasts leave developers with a successful signature but no transaction identifier. You must weigh a clearer execution signal against preserving the application’s broadcast boundary.
Why it isn’t already fixed
Every obvious fix costs something else. That’s the part you’d have to decide.
- signing clarity vs broadcast ownership
- developer diagnosis vs sensitive metadata exposure
- fast iteration vs API compatibility
- richer telemetry vs request latency
Why Stripe
Privy’s XRP Ledger support separates signing from transaction construction and broadcast, making the handoff visible to developers essential.
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.