Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

etherscan requests failing #1702

Closed
saihaj opened this issue Jul 29, 2024 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #1735
Closed

etherscan requests failing #1702

saihaj opened this issue Jul 29, 2024 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #1735
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@saihaj
Copy link
Member

saihaj commented Jul 29, 2024

Looks like etherscan made a change where it requires API keys so now all the requests for graph init are failing

@saihaj saihaj added the bug Something isn't working label Jul 29, 2024
@saihaj
Copy link
Member Author

saihaj commented Jul 29, 2024

one way is we do what is being suggested #1001

@saihaj
Copy link
Member Author

saihaj commented Jul 29, 2024

we can also create a Ethercan compat Cloudflare worker. So the API is similar to how Etherscan works but under the hood we can fetch from various datasources. Since the ABIs for a contract address are immutable we can just cache them forever and just serve the content from CDN in almost all the cases

@craigtutterow
Copy link

We could use the BlockScout smart contract API. Blockscout is in a contract verification alliance with Sourcify that was mentioned in #1001. API docs are here: https://eth.blockscout.com/api-docs. Relevant one is the /smart-contract/{address-hash} endpoint

@fschoell
Copy link
Collaborator

fschoell commented Oct 3, 2024

added a workaround for this in #1736 which proxies requests for now until we have a better and ideally decentralised solution

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants