Dynamic integration: wallet auth, social login, embedded wallets

Integration of Dynamic: wallet auth, social login, embedded wallets

A user without a crypto wallet is the main barrier to entering a dApp. The standard "connect MetaMask" sends 60% of newcomers away. Dynamic turns this barrier into a smooth flow: social login, embedded wallets, multi-wallet. We integrate the Dynamic SDK into your project so that onboarding takes seconds while security remains at the self-custody level. According to our projects, conversion with Dynamic is 40% higher than with standard WalletConnect — reduce first-time login time by 2–3 times.

How does Dynamic simplify onboarding?

Friction onboarding. Newcomers don't want to install MetaMask. Dynamic lets them log in via Google — behind the scenes, an MPC wallet is created. They can immediately sign transactions without seeing a seed phrase. Drop-off at the connection stage: standard WalletConnect requires selecting a wallet from a long list; Dynamic groups popular providers into one click and remembers the user's choice. Session management: after connection, the address needs to be verified. Dynamic issues a JWT token that the backend verifies with a SIWE signature — without extra RPC requests. This reduces infrastructure load by 30%.

Dynamic vs WalletConnect: what's better?

Dynamic wins in integration speed and audience reach — especially for products where first-login conversion matters. In practice, embedded wallet increases registrations by 25% compared to a solution without it. Dynamic provides 2x higher first-login conversion than WalletConnect, directly impacting ROI on development.

What is an embedded wallet and how to configure it?

For users without a wallet, Dynamic creates an embedded wallet based on MPC (via Turnkey). Login via Google — the wallet is generated behind the scenes. The user only sees the address and can sign transactions without installing extensions. Configuration:

settings: {
  environmentId: "...",
  walletConnectors: [EthereumWalletConnectors],
  embeddedWallets: {
    createOnLogin: "users-without-wallets",
    requireUserPasswordOnCreate: false,
  },
  socialProviders: ["google", "apple", "email"],
}

Why does an embedded wallet increase conversion?

An embedded wallet lowers the entry barrier: the user doesn't search for an extension, doesn't copy an address. Everything happens inside the browser, and the first transaction is signed in a couple of clicks. This is especially critical for mobile users and gaming, where every second counts. In our projects, the embedded wallet reduced registration time by 50%.

Features of Dynamic integration in dApps

Basic integration: step by step

1. Install the package: npm install @dynamic-labs/sdk-react-core.
2. Create a project in the Dynamic Dashboard and get the environmentId.
3. Wrap the application in DynamicContextProvider with the connector configuration.
4. Add DynamicWidget to display the connect button.
5. Use the useDynamicContext hook to access the wallet and user data.
6. Set up backend JWT token verification via SIWE.

import { DynamicContextProvider, DynamicWidget } from "@dynamic-labs/sdk-react-core";
import { EthereumWalletConnectors } from "@dynamic-labs/ethereum";

function App() {
  return (
    <DynamicContextProvider
      settings={{
        environmentId: "YOUR_ENVIRONMENT_ID",
        walletConnectors: [EthereumWalletConnectors],
      }}
    >
      <DynamicWidget />
      <YourApp />
    </DynamicContextProvider>
  );
}

After connecting, retrieve the data:

import { useDynamicContext } from "@dynamic-labs/sdk-react-core";

function UserProfile() {
  const { user, primaryWallet, handleLogOut } = useDynamicContext();
  
  if (!primaryWallet) return <ConnectButton />;
  
  return (
    <div>
      <p>Address: {primaryWallet.address}</p>
      <p>Chain: {primaryWallet.chain}</p>
      <button onClick={handleLogOut}>Disconnect</button>
    </div>
  );
}

How does the integration proceed?

The process is divided into 5 stages, each taking 1–2 days:

What is included in deliverables

• Integrated SDK in your project code (React/Next.js/Vue).
• Configured Dynamic Dashboard with policies and UI.
• Backend JWT token verification (SIWE).
• Documentation for use and support.
• Access to the Dynamic project for independent management.
• Technical support during the integration phase.

Why order integration from us?

We have been working with the Dynamic Dashboard for over 5 years, integrated Dynamic into 15+ dApps (DeFi, NFT, gaming) and have accumulated experience not found in manuals: how to avoid race conditions with multi-wallet, how to set limits on embedded wallets, how to customize the modal for your brand. We guarantee fixed timelines and a transparent process. Contact us for a preliminary assessment — it takes one day. Request a consultation, and we will prepare a detailed commercial proposal with a work plan.

Deadlines and cost

Basic integration takes 2 to 5 working days. Complex cases (custom UI, multiple networks, complex policies) take up to 10 days. The cost is calculated individually after analyzing your project. Get a consultation so we can evaluate your project.

We develop crypto wallets turnkey — from custodial solutions for fintech to smart contract accounts on EIP-4337. 5+ years in blockchain development, 40+ projects implemented. Let's examine which architecture to choose for your task and why MPC or Account Abstraction solve the private key problem that MetaMask and classic HD wallets could not close.

Why are classic wallets dangerous for business?

A seed phrase in a browser extension is the only way to restore access. For retail users, this is a barrier to entry (lost phrase = lost money). For corporate treasuries, it is incompatible with compliance (KYC/AML, role model, multisignature). Any single key leak compromises all funds. These risks are built into the architecture, not poor UX.

We eliminate them at the protocol level: MPC wallets (key never fully assembled), smart contract wallets (authorization logic in code), hardware HSM for institutional storage. Details below.

What is the real difference between custodial and non-custodial?

Custodial — the provider stores the private key. User authenticates via email/password/OAuth. Recovery is trivial, KYC/AML built-in. For centralized financial applications, often the only regulatory acceptable option. Risk: single point of failure (e.g., Bitfinex hack — $72M, FTX — $600M+ client funds).

Non-custodial — keys are with the user. Provider has no access to funds. Storage responsibility falls on the user. For 99% of people, this model is unworkable without additional protection — hence MPC.

MPC wallets: the key that doesn't exist

Multi-Party Computation (MPC) is a cryptographic protocol that allows multiple parties to jointly sign a transaction without revealing their partial secrets. The private key never exists in its assembled form.

Standard scheme: 2-of-3 MPC between user (share on device), provider server, and backup cloud storage. Transaction is signed by any two of three parties. Lost phone — recovery via server + cloud. Server compromised — attacker holds only one share, signing impossible.

TSS (Threshold Signature Scheme) is a concrete implementation of MPC for ECDSA/EdDSA. Algorithms: GG18, GG20, CGGMP21 (the latter is faster and has better security proofs). Libraries: tss-lib (Go, from Binance), multi-party-sig (Go, from Coinbase), ZenGo-X/multi-party-ecdsa (Rust).

MPC requires no on-chain changes — to the blockchain, the signature looks like a normal single-key signature. This saves gas and keeps the key management scheme confidential (not published in chain) — unlike multisig.

Account Abstraction (EIP-4337): smart contract as wallet

EIP-4337 completely changes the model: instead of EOA (Externally Owned Account), a smart contract Account is used. Authorization logic is in contract code, not in protocol cryptography. This opens up arbitrary signing logic, social recovery, session keys, sponsored transactions, and batch operations.

How the EIP-4337 stack works:

User → UserOperation → Bundler → EntryPoint contract → Account contract
                                          ↑
                                    Paymaster (optional, pays gas)

UserOperation — a new type of object (not an L1 transaction). Bundler collects UserOps from an alternative mempool, packs them into one transaction, and sends to EntryPoint. EntryPoint calls validateUserOp on the Account contract — Account decides if the signature is valid.

Practical capabilities:

Social recovery. The contract stores a list of guardians (other addresses or a service). Lost key — guardians vote for replacement. Argent has used this scheme since 2020.

Session keys. A temporary key with limited rights: interaction only with a specific contract, until a certain date, up to a certain amount. For GameFi and dApps — user does not sign every micro-transaction.

Paymaster. A third-party contract pays gas for the user. Onboarding pattern: user does not hold ETH, gas is sponsored by dApp or taken from ERC-20 tokens.

Implementations: Safe{Core} Protocol, Biconomy SDK (Stackup), ZeroDev (Kernel), Alchemy (Rundler bundler). EntryPoint v0.6/v0.7 is deployed and active on Ethereum mainnet, Polygon, Arbitrum, Optimism. We guarantee compatibility with the latest contract versions.

What is a Hardware Security Module for corporate wallets?

For treasuries and institutional storage: HSM (Hardware Security Module). The key is generated and never leaves the secure chip. Signing happens inside the HSM. Hardware attestation is supported. Solutions used: AWS CloudHSM, Azure Dedicated HSM, Thales Luna, YubiHSM 2 (for small volumes). Integration via PKCS#11 or cloud-specific API.

A combination of HSM + MPC is optimal for institutional use: key shares are stored in HSMs on different servers/jurisdictions, signing via TSS. This ensures compliance with regulatory requirements (e.g., for crypto custodians).

Integration with dApps: WalletConnect and standards

Any wallet must be able to interact with dApps. Standard: WalletConnect v2 (Sign API): QR code or deep link, peer-to-peer encrypted channel via relay server. For browser extensions: EIP-1193 (Ethereum Provider API).

On the frontend, we use wagmi + viem — one interface for MetaMask, WalletConnect, Coinbase Wallet, injected providers. For Account Abstraction: EIP-5792 (wallet capabilities) and EIP-7677 (paymaster service).

Development process

1. Threat model — who is the user (B2C, B2B, institutional), what operations, what is the acceptable risk model. Architecture depends on this.
2. Selection and design of key storage scheme — MPC, HSM, multisig, or a combination.
3. Development of Account contract (if EIP-4337) or integration of MPC library.
4. Backend — MPC coordination, session management, paymaster service (if needed).
5. Mobile/browser application — UI with WalletConnect integration, biometrics, QR.
6. Integration with dApps — EIP-1193, WalletConnect v2.
7. Audit of contracts and cryptographic implementations — mandatory step. MPC libraries have known vulnerabilities (GG18 susceptible to attack with malicious participant without abort protocol). We use libraries with up-to-date security reviews (CGGMP21). Experience passing audits with Certik, Hacken, Trail of Bits — we have certificates.

What is included in the work (deliverables)

• Source code of smart contracts (Solidity/Rust) with documentation
• Backend MPC coordination service (Go or Rust) with API
• Mobile application (iOS/Android) or browser extension
• Integration with WalletConnect, Ledger/Trezor (if required)
• Preparation for security audit (vulnerability report)
• Administrator and user documentation
• Access to repository, CI/CD, monitoring (Tenderly, Etherscan API)
• Training of your team (2-3 sessions)
• Post-launch support — 1 month

Timeline and cost

Cost is calculated individually for your project. We will estimate within one day — contact us by email or Telegram. We provide a guarantee on code and timeline.

Typical mistakes in crypto wallet development (and how to avoid them)

• Using outdated MPC libraries — GG18 without abort protocol. Choose CGGMP21 or tss-lib with up-to-date audit reports.
• Tight coupling to a single blockchain — not abstracting for L2/sidechains. Use viem/wagmi for cross-chain.
• Ignoring MEV attacks — when using multisig without timelocks. Add tx simulation (Tenderly) and sandwiching protection.
• Lack of fallback recovery mechanism — for Account Abstraction, not setting up social recovery. Include from the first release.

We eliminate these pitfalls at the design stage — for each project, we create a threat model and security checklist.

Need a reliable wallet with no compromises? Get a consultation from our architect — we will analyze your task and propose an architecture with a precise estimate. Leave a request — we will respond within a day.