feat: solana support #123

wenfix · 2026-01-20T13:36:59Z

Explanation

Introduces @metamask/connect-solana, a new package that wraps @metamask/solana-wallet-standard with MetaMask Connect, enabling Solana dapps to use MetaMask via the wallet-standard protocol. It also adds playground support for solana-wallet-standard which enables testing this feature.

Testing Steps

Install dependencies and build (yarn install && yarn build)
Launch browser playground (yarn workspace @metamask/browser-playground start)
Click Connect (Solana) button (ensure no extension is installed if using desktop browser)
Confirm connection -> Solana Card should appear in dapp
Try interactions available interactions such as sign, which should succeed.

References

Fixes WAPI-751

Checklist

I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate
I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or updated code as appropriate
I've communicated my changes to consumers by updating changelogs for packages I've changed, highlighting breaking changes as necessary
I've prepared draft pull requests for clients and consumer packages to resolve any breaking changes

socket-security · 2026-01-20T13:37:46Z

Review the following changes in direct dependencies. Learn more about Socket for GitHub.

Diff	Package	Supply Chain Security	Vulnerability	Quality	Maintenance	License
	@solana/wallet-standard-chains@1.1.1
	@wallet-standard/base@1.1.0
	@solana/wallet-adapter-react-ui@0.9.39
	@solana/wallet-adapter-react@0.15.39
	@metamask/solana-wallet-standard@0.6.0

View full report

socket-security · 2026-01-20T13:37:48Z

All alerts resolved. Learn more about Socket for GitHub.

This PR previously contained dependency changes with security issues that have been resolved, removed, or ignored.

Ignoring alerts on:

@solana/wallet-standard-features@1.3.0
@solana/wallet-standard-util@1.1.2
@solana/wallet-standard-core@1.1.2
@solana/wallet-standard-chains@1.1.1

View full report

wenfix · 2026-01-20T16:50:33Z

@SocketSecurity ignore npm/@solana/wallet-standard-chains@1.1.1
@SocketSecurity ignore npm/@solana/wallet-standard-core@1.1.2
@SocketSecurity ignore npm/@solana/wallet-standard-features@1.3.0
@SocketSecurity ignore npm/@solana/wallet-standard-util@1.1.2

solana-devs is a known publisher of Solana related libraries.

adonesky1 · 2026-01-20T18:41:52Z

packages/connect-solana/src/connect.ts

+  const core = await createMultichainClient({
+    dapp: options.dapp,
+    api: {
+      supportedNetworks: options.api?.supportedNetworks ?? {},


Maybe we add mainnet as the default?

Suggested change

supportedNetworks: options.api?.supportedNetworks ?? {},

supportedNetworks: options.api?.supportedNetworks ?? {

'solana:5eykt4UsFv8P8NJdTREpY1vzqKqZKvdp': 'https://api.mainnet-beta.solana.com'

},

IMO we should not expect the solana namespace to be included in the callers options.api.supportedNetworks key values

^ in reference to how there is no massaging going on here. Not about Donesky's comment.

I think you might need to be a bit more clear about your followup comments here Jiexi I don't think I fully understand

What I understand is that'd be preferable to just receive the RPC URL, perhaps mapped to one of mainnet, devnet, testnet instead of the Solana namespace?
Something like:

{ 'mainnet': 'https://api.mainnet-beta.solana.com' }

And we do the namespace mapping ourselves. WDYT?

Here's what I'm suggesting: ec248c8

ahh sorry for the ambiguity.

I mean that this logic might look more like

// no `solana:` prefix options.api.supportedNetworks = { '5eykt4UsFv8P8NJdTREpY1vzqKqZKvdp': 'https://api.mainnet-beta.solana.com' } const supportedNetworksWithSolanaNamespace = Object.fromEntries( Object.entries(originalObject).map(([key, value]) => [ `solana:${key}`, value ]) ) ... { supportedNetworks: supportedNetworksWithSolanaNamespace }

i.e. supportedNetworks is expected just to be the genesis hash (which identifies the network/chain) without the solana: prefix which we will add ourselves before passing it to createMultichainClient

yeah I suppose this makes sense though we currently for connect-evm we use the full caip chainIds ->

connect-monorepo/packages/connect-evm/src/connect.ts

Line 941 in ec248c8

supportedNetworks: options.api.supportedNetworks,

&

connect-monorepo/packages/connect-multichain/src/domain/multichain/api/types.ts

Lines 81 to 85 in ec248c8

export type RpcUrlsMap = {

/** CAIP-2 format chain ID mapped to its RPC URL (e.g., "eip155:1" -> "https://...") */

[chainId: CaipChainId]: string;

};

jiexi · 2026-01-23T23:37:13Z

packages/connect-solana/package.json

@@ -0,0 +1,80 @@
+{
+  "name": "@metamask/connect-solana",
+  "version": "0.1.0",


this needs to start at 0.0.0

jiexi · 2026-01-26T19:13:19Z

packages/connect-solana/src/types.ts

+export type SolanaClient = {
+  /** The underlying MultichainCore instance */
+  core: MultichainCore;
+  /**
+   * Gets a wallet-standard compatible wallet instance.
+   * @param walletName - Optional custom name for the wallet
+   * @returns The wallet instance
+   */
+  getWallet: (walletName?: string) => Wallet;
+  /**
+   * Registers the MetaMask wallet with the wallet-standard registry.
+   * This makes MetaMask automatically discoverable by Solana dapps.
+   * @param walletName - Optional custom name for the wallet
+   */
+  registerWallet: (walletName?: string) => Promise<void>;
+  /**
+   * Disconnects from the wallet and revokes the session.
+   */
+  disconnect: () => Promise<void>;
+};


the EVM and Solana Clients are pretty different at this point. I wonder if we should try to establish a common pattern. For example should we remove the request() method from ConnectEvm and make the 1193 provider the only way to make requests like we are kind of doing here? (i know MultichainCore is exposed though)

jiexi · 2026-01-26T19:16:00Z

packages/connect-solana/CHANGELOG.md

+
+### Added
+
+- Initial release ([#123](https://github.com/MetaMask/connect-monorepo/pull/123))


technically we aren't releasing it yet. sorry to nit pick lol

jiexi · 2026-01-26T19:17:40Z

packages/connect-solana/src/types.ts

+   * This makes MetaMask automatically discoverable by Solana dapps.
+   * @param walletName - Optional custom name for the wallet
+   */
+  registerWallet: (walletName?: string) => Promise<void>;


we should align on if MMC or the dapp is responsible for determining if an announcement event should be made here and for EVM

Think we're going to need to sync on this one as well @jiexi, not sure I follow

Right now it is the dapp's responsibility to call registerWallet() in order to make the MMC created provider discoverable rather than MMC automatically announcing itself. Does this seem like the right pattern? I was more on the of side of MMC automatically announcing itself being better, but kind of changing my mind now.

tldr; nevermind this is good!

jiexi · 2026-01-26T19:18:48Z

packages/connect-solana/src/types.ts

+/**
+ * Configuration options for creating a Solana client.
+ */
+export type SolanaConnectOptions = {


should this be derived more directly from ConnectMultichain types instead like we do for the EVM client?

Pick<MultichainOptions, 'dapp' | 'api'> & { ui?: Omit<MultichainOptions['ui'], 'factory'>; } & { eventHandlers?: Partial<EventHandlers>; debug?: boolean; }

jiexi · 2026-01-26T19:22:23Z

packages/connect-solana/src/types.ts

+  };
+  /** Optional API configuration */
+  api?: {
+    /** A map of CAIP chain IDs to RPC URLs for supported networks */


should this be Solana Genesis Hash to RPC URLs?

🤔 also not following this one haha

jiexi · 2026-01-26T19:30:16Z

playground/browser-playground/craco.config.js

why are the changes here needed? Sorry if obvious 🙏

Swapped 'require' before 'import' to prefer CommonJS over ESM. This is likely because some Solana packages (like @solana/web3.js or @metamask/solana-wallet-standard) have dual CJS/ESM exports, and their ESM builds may have compatibility issues with the Create React App / webpack setup. Preferring CommonJS avoids those issues.

This disables webpack's "fully specified" requirement for .mjs files from node_modules. Without this, webpack would require imports like import foo from './bar.js' (with extension), but many ESM packages use import foo from './bar' (without extension). Solana ecosystem packages often trigger this issue.

Tried unswapping these to resolve this issue but it didn't help 😢

From Claude re this issue

Three versions of bs58 → base-x:

bs58 version base-x version Pulled in by

4.0.1 3.0.11 (CJS only) @solana/web3.js, borsh

5.0.0 4.0.1 @solana-mobile/* packages

6.0.0 5.0.1 (ESM + CJS) @metamask/solana-wallet-standard, @reown/appkit, @walletconnect/utils

Why this causes the error:

Webpack hoists the oldest version - base-x@3.0.11 gets installed at the root node_modules/base-x/ because it was likely resolved first or has the most dependents.

Nested versions exist but webpack ignores them - base-x@5.0.1 is nested inside node_modules/bs58/node_modules/base-x/, but when webpack sees import basex from 'base-x', it resolves from the root, not the nested location.

ESM/CJS mismatch - bs58@6.0.0 (used by your Solana wallet adapter chain) has ESM code that does:

import basex from 'base-x'; export default basex(ALPHABET); // expects basex to be a function

But base-x@3.0.11 (the hoisted version) is CJS-only with a different export structure, so basex isn't a function.

jiexi · 2026-01-26T19:31:28Z

package.json

    "yargs": "^17.7.2"
  },
+  "resolutions": {
+    "@metamask/utils": "^11.8.1",


why did this get moved to the root level package.json?

and why the bs58 forced resolution?

both were (unsafe) attempts at reducing bundle size. I've removed them. 9e771ff

jiexi · 2026-01-26T19:37:50Z

packages/connect-solana/src/connect.test.ts

+    expect(client.core).toBe(mockCore);
+  });
+
+  it('should get wallet using getWalletStandard', async () => {


thoughts on moving the tests starting from here and down into their own scenarios? everything above this is definitely more related to createSolanaClient but i don't think the ones starting here and below are

jiexi · 2026-01-26T19:45:21Z

playground/browser-playground/src/components/SolanaWalletCard.tsx

+    try {
+      const encodedMessage = new TextEncoder().encode(message);
+      const signature = await signMessage(encodedMessage);
+      setSignedMessage(Buffer.from(signature).toString('base64'));


doesn't really matter but is there a way to do this without Buffer?

again, doesn't really matter though

jiexi · 2026-01-26T19:48:08Z

playground/browser-playground/src/App.tsx

+  const connectSolana = useCallback(async () => {
+    // Find the MetaMask wallet in registered wallets
+    const metamaskWallet = wallets.find((w) => 
+      w.adapter.name.toLowerCase().includes('metamask')


is there a chance this will perfer the extension announced event instead of the ConnectSolana one?

adonesky1 · 2026-01-28T22:42:13Z

Running into a build issue on the browser playground:

wenfix added 2 commits January 20, 2026 13:30

add connect-solana

368f89f

add solana support to browser-playground

fa717a2

wenfix added 5 commits January 20, 2026 13:45

update changelogs

2f83664

fix changelogs

e35f4ac

add connect solana button to playground

5a6fd8c

update package.json keyword constraints validation

74a76f2

fix changelog

5905e2c

wenfix marked this pull request as ready for review January 20, 2026 15:10

wenfix requested a review from a team as a code owner January 20, 2026 15:10

wenfix added 3 commits January 20, 2026 15:14

add basic unit tests

61b0930

adjust vitest config

4b203d4

add test mocks

c5dffd4

adonesky1 reviewed Jan 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

jiexi reviewed Jan 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

jiexi reviewed Jan 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

wenfix added 3 commits January 27, 2026 11:11

update changelog

e3bcd7a

update license

3543154

update package version

0f0590d

wenfix added 4 commits January 27, 2026 11:49

remove resolutions

9e771ff

update types

e0f37b6

re-organize tests

ea2d9d5

refactor RPC url configuration

ec248c8

	export type RpcUrlsMap = {
	/** CAIP-2 format chain ID mapped to its RPC URL (e.g., "eip155:1" -> "https://...") */
	[chainId: CaipChainId]: string;
	};


		### Added

		- Initial release ([#123](https://github.com/MetaMask/connect-monorepo/pull/123))

bs58 version	base-x version	Pulled in by
4.0.1	3.0.11 (CJS only)	`@solana/web3.js`, `borsh`
5.0.0	4.0.1	`@solana-mobile/*` packages
6.0.0	5.0.1 (ESM + CJS)	`@metamask/solana-wallet-standard`, `@reown/appkit`, `@walletconnect/utils`

Uh oh!

feat: solana support #123

Are you sure you want to change the base?

feat: solana support #123

Uh oh!

Conversation

wenfix commented Jan 20, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation

Testing Steps

References

Checklist

Uh oh!

socket-security bot commented Jan 20, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

socket-security bot commented Jan 20, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

wenfix commented Jan 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

adonesky1 Jan 28, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jiexi Jan 26, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Three versions of bs58 → base-x:

Why this causes the error:

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

wenfix commented Jan 20, 2026 •

edited

Loading

socket-security bot commented Jan 20, 2026 •

edited

Loading

socket-security bot commented Jan 20, 2026 •

edited

Loading

adonesky1 Jan 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

jiexi Jan 26, 2026 •

edited

Loading