Official MASTR logo MASTR Support the work
Contents
← Wiki home

Wallets & security

Signed permits: a message can authorise spending

Paying no gas does not make a signature harmless.

Security guide · 1 min read

Research articles and reference entries are published in English. Navigation is available in seven languages.

In this article
  1. Read the scope

Some token permissions can be authorised by a signed message and submitted later by another party. ERC-2612 defines a permit approach using signed data, an allowance, a nonce and a deadline. Permit2 provides additional permission mechanisms used by applications. Their convenience does not remove the need to inspect what is authorised.

Read the scope

Check the asset, spender, amount, network context and expiration. A screen describing a signature as verification does not determine its effect. The underlying authorisation may concern token spending.

The initial permission and the later use can happen at different times. A user may therefore see no immediate loss after signing and incorrectly conclude that the request was harmless. Reusing a familiar wallet interface does not authenticate the requesting website.

If a suspicious signature has already been given, identify its actual type and affected permissions before deciding what action is appropriate. Disconnecting a site is not a universal cancellation mechanism. Read allowances and signing intent.

Sources

  1. ERC-2612: signed token allowances
  2. Uniswap: Permit2 overview

Research checked 5 September 2026. Historical cases retain the date and legal status of the cited record.

Related reading

MASTR

Support independent research

The investigations, original evidence and guides here are free to read. Voluntary donations help fund the research and keep MASTR’s tools available.

Open wallet