fix: one transaction approval at a time, and honest copy for a nonce collision (closes #271)

README.md

@@ -1200,7 +1200,11 @@ on ConfirmTx, DeleteWallet, ApproveTx and ApproveSign.
   opening the window, so the screen shows a complete transaction and the signed
   artifact can be compared with it field for field. A request that cannot be
   populated — unreachable node, reverting gas estimate — opens no window and is
-  failed back to the site.
+  failed back to the site. Only one transaction approval exists at a time:
+  populating fixes the nonce, so a second `eth_sendTransaction` arriving while
+  one is unanswered is refused with EIP-1193 code `-32002` rather than being
+  populated at the same nonce. It opens no window and takes no nonce, and the
+  site can send it again once the pending one is answered.
 - **Elements**:
     - "Transaction Request" heading
     - Phishing warning banner (shown when the hostname is on the phishing

TODO.md

@@ -70,6 +70,31 @@ undefined identifiers, which is how
   stubbed RPC and the unobservable toolbar popup — were checked against the
   current `src/content/inpage.js` and `tests/e2e/` and left as they are
   ([#285](https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/285)).
+- 2026-08-17: One transaction approval at a time. Populating in the background
+  before the window opens is what makes the displayed object the verified
+  object, and it also fixes the nonce: two `eth_sendTransaction` calls populated
+  concurrently took the same nonce from a node that had seen neither broadcast,
+  and the second could then never be sent, because the only way to give it a
+  fresh nonce is to populate it again after the user has read the old one off
+  the screen. A second request is now refused with EIP-1193 `-32002` while one
+  is unanswered — the slot is taken immediately before population, after the
+  authorization checks, so no second nonce is allocated, no second window opens,
+  and a page the wallet refuses anyway cannot hold the slot against the
+  connected site. The slot is freed at `settleApproval()`, the single point an
+  approval is retired, so every path that ends an approval ends the hold with
+  it; an approval whose window is gone and whose attempt has failed is settled
+  there rather than left waiting on a window that no longer exists, and an
+  approval window that could not be opened at all is answered with `-32603`
+  instead of holding the page's promise open. Signature approvals are not gated,
+  consuming no nonce. A collision that does happen is also reported accurately
+  now: a broadcast the node refused for the nonce, and an approval carrying a
+  nonce this worker has already broadcast for that address on that chain (caught
+  before the node is asked at all), both say the transaction did not reach the
+  network and to send it again, instead of warning that it may have sent. The
+  record is keyed by chain as well as address, because nonce spaces are per
+  chain and low nonces overlap across them. `already known` deliberately keeps
+  the ambiguous wording, because a node that says it has the transaction has it
+  ([#271](https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/271)).
 - 2026-08-14: The parts of the
   [#150](https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/150) and
   [#151](https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/151) definition of done the

src/background/index.js

@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ const {
     TX_STAGE_VERIFY,
     TX_STAGE_BROADCAST,
     TX_STAGE_INFLIGHT,
+    TX_STAGE_NONCE,
 } = require("../shared/approvalVerify");
 const { prepareApprovalTx } = require("../shared/approvalTx");
 const {
@@ -57,6 +58,114 @@ const connectedSites = {};
 // Pending approval requests: { id: { origin, hostname, resolve } }
 const pendingApprovals = {};
 
+// One transaction approval at a time, wallet-wide.
+//
+// The transaction a site asks for is populated before its approval window
+// opens, so that the object the user is shown is the object the signed
+// artifact is verified against. Populating fixes the nonce. Two requests
+// populated concurrently therefore take the SAME nonce — the node reports the
+// same pending count to both, neither having been broadcast — and whichever is
+// broadcast second is refused by the network for a nonce it can never be
+// re-signed at, because re-signing it would mean signing something other than
+// what was displayed.
+//
+// So the second request is refused while the first is unanswered. It is
+// refused before anything is populated, so no second nonce is allocated at
+// all, and while the page is still waiting with nothing on screen. The
+// alternatives were considered and rejected in
+// https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/271: populating again at Confirm
+// puts a nonce on screen that is not the nonce that gets signed, and
+// allocating around in-flight approvals makes the wallet's own bookkeeping the
+// authority on a nonce the network has not accepted, which an abandoned
+// approval then leaves a hole in.
+//
+// Sign approvals are not gated: a signature consumes no nonce.
+//
+// The slot is null when free, and otherwise the handle of the request holding
+// it. Once that request has raised its approval the handle carries the
+// approval's id, so that retiring the approval frees the slot: every exit from
+// pendingApprovals goes through settleApproval(), which makes that one hook
+// complete. The holder's own finally is the backstop for the interval before
+// the approval exists.
+let txApprovalSlot = null;
+
+// EIP-1474 "resource unavailable": the standard code for a request that is
+// refused because another one is already pending.
+const TX_APPROVAL_PENDING_CODE = -32002;
+
+// True at every moment this can be sent: the slot is taken immediately before
+// the transaction is populated, so the other request is either being prepared
+// or on screen. It does not claim the other one is displayed yet, because for
+// the length of one network round trip it is not.
+const TX_APPROVAL_PENDING_MESSAGE =
+    "AutistMask handles one transaction at a time, and another one is" +
+    " already in progress, so this one was not sent. Please finish that" +
+    " transaction, then send this one again.";
+
+// Take the slot, or refuse. Nothing awaits between the test and the set, so
+// two requests that reach this in the same tick cannot both pass it — the
+// position of the call in the handler is irrelevant to that, which is why it
+// sits after the authorization checks. A page the wallet is going to refuse
+// anyway must not be able to take the slot away from the connected site.
+function reserveTxApprovalSlot() {
+    if (txApprovalSlot) return null;
+    txApprovalSlot = { approvalId: null };
+    return txApprovalSlot;
+}
+
+// Free the slot, if this handle is still the one holding it.
+function releaseTxApprovalSlot(handle) {
+    if (handle && txApprovalSlot !== handle) return;
+    txApprovalSlot = null;
+}
+
+// Free the slot held on behalf of a retired approval. Called from
+// settleApproval() for every approval, and a no-op for the ones the slot was
+// not taken for.
+function releaseTxApprovalSlotFor(approvalId) {
+    if (txApprovalSlot && txApprovalSlot.approvalId === approvalId) {
+        txApprovalSlot = null;
+    }
+}
+
+// Nonces this worker has already handed to the node, per chain and address.
+// This is the wallet's own knowledge that a nonce is spent, and it is checked
+// before a broadcast rather than after: a node's pending count can lag a
+// transaction it has itself just accepted, and a request populated inside that
+// window would otherwise be signed and sent at a nonce this wallet has already
+// used.
+//
+// The chain is part of the key because nonce spaces are per chain and the
+// wallet switches networks. Without it a nonce spent on one chain would refuse
+// that nonce on every other chain — and low nonces overlap across chains as a
+// matter of course, so the refusal would be both routine and false.
+//
+// The record dies with the worker, which is correct rather than merely
+// convenient: after a restart the node's count is the only answer available,
+// and a transaction of this wallet's that the node has forgotten is one the
+// user does want to be able to send again.
+const broadcastNonces = {};
+
+function broadcastNoncesFor(chainId, address) {
+    const key =
+        String(chainId).toLowerCase() +
+        ":" +
+        String(address || "").toLowerCase();
+    if (!broadcastNonces[key]) broadcastNonces[key] = new Set();
+    return broadcastNonces[key];
+}
+
+// An approved transaction's nonce as a decimal string, or null if it cannot be
+// read as a number. Verification refuses an unreadable nonce before this is
+// ever reached; null here only keeps the record from holding junk.
+function approvedNonce(approvedTx) {
+    try {
+        return BigInt(approvedTx.nonce).toString();
+    } catch {
+        return null;
+    }
+}
+
 async function getState() {
     const result = await storageApi.get("autistmask");
     return (
@@ -148,11 +257,41 @@ function settleApproval(id, result, options) {
     const holdsClaim = !!(options && options.holdsClaim);
     if (approval.attemptInFlight && !holdsClaim) return false;
     delete pendingApprovals[id];
+    // The transaction-approval slot is held for exactly as long as the
+    // approval it was taken for is alive, and this is the one place an
+    // approval stops being alive.
+    releaseTxApprovalSlotFor(id);
     approval.resolve(result);
     resetPopupUrl();
     return true;
 }
 
+// What a pending approval resolves to when it is given up on rather than
+// answered: the window was closed, or could not be opened at all. A tx or sign
+// approval answers the requesting page in EIP-1193 shape; a site-connection
+// approval answers the connection handler in its own.
+function abandonedResult(approval, code, message) {
+    if (approval.type === "tx" || approval.type === "sign") {
+        return { error: { code, message } };
+    }
+    return { approved: false, remember: false };
+}
+
+// A window the user closed without answering is a refusal by the user, which
+// is 4001 and the wording every other rejection path already uses.
+const APPROVAL_REJECTED_CODE = 4001;
+const APPROVAL_REJECTED_MESSAGE = "User rejected the request.";
+
+// The window could not be opened, so the user was never asked. This is the
+// wallet failing, not the user refusing, so it does not claim to be a
+// rejection: -32603 is the JSON-RPC code for the wallet's own internal
+// failure, and the page is told plainly that nothing was shown.
+const APPROVAL_WINDOW_FAILED_CODE = -32603;
+
+const APPROVAL_WINDOW_FAILED_MESSAGE =
+    "AutistMask could not open its approval window, so this request was not" +
+    " shown to you and nothing was sent.";
+
 // Take exclusive hold of a pending approval for one attempt, or refuse.
 //
 // An approval that failed retryably has to stay in pendingApprovals, so its
@@ -172,8 +311,26 @@ function claimApproval(approval) {
 
 // Release an approval whose attempt failed in a way the user can retry.
 // Nothing was broadcast, so the next attempt may claim it.
+//
+// Unless the window it would be retried in is already gone. The user closed it
+// while the attempt was running and settleApproval() declined then, correctly,
+// because the attempt still owned the approval; the attempt has now failed, so
+// nothing owns it and nothing can reach it. Left standing it would hold the
+// requesting page's promise open forever and, with it, the transaction
+// approval slot. It is settled here as the rejection the closed window
+// already meant.
 function releaseApproval(approval) {
     approval.attemptInFlight = false;
+    if (approval.windowClosed) {
+        settleApproval(
+            approval.id,
+            abandonedResult(
+                approval,
+                APPROVAL_REJECTED_CODE,
+                APPROVAL_REJECTED_MESSAGE,
+            ),
+        );
+    }
 }
 
 // Open approval in a separate popup window.
@@ -200,9 +357,35 @@ function openApprovalWindow(id) {
             );
         }
         windowsApi.create(opts, (win) => {
-            if (win) {
+            const approval = pendingApprovals[id];
-                pendingApprovals[id].windowId = win.id;
+            if (!approval) {
+                // Settled while the window was opening — an address switch,
+                // say. Nothing is waiting on it, and a window showing an
+                // approval that no longer exists is not left on screen.
+                if (win) {
+                    windowsApi.remove(win.id, () => {
+                        if (runtime.lastError) {
+                            // window already closed
+                        }
+                    });
+                }
+                return;
             }
+            if (!win) {
+                // No window means no way to ever answer this approval, and an
+                // approval nothing can answer holds the requesting page's
+                // promise open forever. Settle it now instead.
+                settleApproval(
+                    id,
+                    abandonedResult(
+                        approval,
+                        APPROVAL_WINDOW_FAILED_CODE,
+                        APPROVAL_WINDOW_FAILED_MESSAGE,
+                    ),
+                );
+                return;
+            }
+            approval.windowId = win.id;
         });
     });
 }
@@ -212,7 +395,7 @@ function openApprovalWindow(id) {
 function requestApproval(origin, hostname) {
     return new Promise((resolve) => {
         const id = crypto.randomUUID();
-        pendingApprovals[id] = { origin, hostname, resolve };
+        pendingApprovals[id] = { id, origin, hostname, resolve };
 
         if (actionApi && typeof actionApi.openPopup === "function") {
             actionApi.setPopup({
@@ -243,10 +426,13 @@ function requestApproval(origin, hostname) {
 // it is pinned here rather than read again at signing time — an address switch
 // between approval and signing must refuse, not sign from an account this
 // screen never named.
-function requestTxApproval(origin, hostname, approvedTx, approvedFrom) {
+// `slot` is the transaction-approval slot its caller holds. Handing the
+// approval's id to it is what makes retiring the approval free the slot.
+function requestTxApproval(origin, hostname, approvedTx, approvedFrom, slot) {
     return new Promise((resolve) => {
         const id = crypto.randomUUID();
         pendingApprovals[id] = {
+            id,
             origin,
             hostname,
             approvedTx,
@@ -254,6 +440,7 @@ function requestTxApproval(origin, hostname, approvedTx, approvedFrom) {
             resolve,
             type: "tx",
         };
+        if (slot) slot.approvalId = id;
 
         openApprovalWindow(id);
     });
@@ -267,6 +454,7 @@ function requestSignApproval(origin, hostname, signParams, approvedFrom) {
     return new Promise((resolve) => {
         const id = crypto.randomUUID();
         pendingApprovals[id] = {
+            id,
             origin,
             hostname,
             signParams,
@@ -585,31 +773,68 @@ async function handleRpc(method, params, origin) {
     }
 
     if (method === "eth_sendTransaction") {
-        const s = await getState();
+        return await handleSendTransaction(params, origin);
-        const activeAddress = await getActiveAddress();
+    }
-        if (!activeAddress)
-            return { error: { message: "No accounts available" } };
 
-        const hostname = extractHostname(origin);
+    // Proxy safe read-only methods to the RPC node
-        const allowed = s.allowedSites[activeAddress] || [];
+    if (PROXY_METHODS.includes(method)) {
-        if (
+        try {
-            !allowed.includes(hostname) &&
+            const result = await proxyRpc(method, params);
-            !connectedSites[origin + ":" + activeAddress]
+            return { result };
-        ) {
+        } catch (e) {
-            return { error: { code: 4100, message: "Unauthorized" } };
+            return { error: { message: e.message } };
         }
+    }
 
-        const txParams = params?.[0] || {};
+    return { error: { message: "Unsupported method: " + method } };
-        if (namesAnotherAddress(txParams.from, activeAddress)) {
+}
-            return {
-                error: {
-                    code: 4100,
-                    message:
-                        "This site asked to send from an address that is not the active one.",
-                },
-            };
-        }
 
+// The body of eth_sendTransaction, from the connection check through to the
+// user's decision. It takes the single transaction-approval slot once it knows
+// it is going to populate a transaction, and holds it until the requesting
+// page has its answer.
+async function handleSendTransaction(params, origin) {
+    const s = await getState();
+    const activeAddress = await getActiveAddress();
+    if (!activeAddress) return { error: { message: "No accounts available" } };
+
+    const hostname = extractHostname(origin);
+    const allowed = s.allowedSites[activeAddress] || [];
+    if (
+        !allowed.includes(hostname) &&
+        !connectedSites[origin + ":" + activeAddress]
+    ) {
+        return { error: { code: 4100, message: "Unauthorized" } };
+    }
+
+    const txParams = params?.[0] || {};
+    if (namesAnotherAddress(txParams.from, activeAddress)) {
+        return {
+            error: {
+                code: 4100,
+                message:
+                    "This site asked to send from an address that is not the active one.",
+            },
+        };
+    }
+
+    // Everything above refuses without populating anything, so the slot is
+    // taken here rather than at the top of the handler: a page the wallet was
+    // never going to serve must not be able to hold the slot and make the
+    // connected site's own transaction fail as "already in progress". The
+    // reservation is atomic because nothing awaits between its test and its
+    // set, not because of where it sits.
+    const slot = reserveTxApprovalSlot();
+    if (!slot) {
+        return {
+            error: {
+                code: TX_APPROVAL_PENDING_CODE,
+                message: TX_APPROVAL_PENDING_MESSAGE,
+            },
+        };
+    }
+
+    try {
         // Populate here, before any window opens, so that the transaction the
         // user is shown is a complete one and is the same object the signed
         // artifact is checked against. A failure raises no approval at all and
@@ -644,22 +869,17 @@ async function handleRpc(method, params, origin) {
             hostname,
             approvedTx,
             activeAddress,
+            slot,
         );
         if (decision.error) return { error: decision.error };
         return { result: decision.txHash };
+    } finally {
+        // Retiring the approval has normally freed the slot already, through
+        // settleApproval(); this covers the paths that return before an
+        // approval exists at all, and frees nothing if another request has
+        // since taken the slot.
+        releaseTxApprovalSlot(slot);
     }
-
-    // Proxy safe read-only methods to the RPC node
-    if (PROXY_METHODS.includes(method)) {
-        try {
-            const result = await proxyRpc(method, params);
-            return { result };
-        } catch (e) {
-            return { error: { message: e.message } };
-        }
-    }
-
-    return { error: { message: "Unsupported method: " + method } };
 }
 
 // Broadcast chainChanged to all tabs when the network is switched.
@@ -694,15 +914,11 @@ async function broadcastAccountsChanged() {
     // being signed and broadcast right now, and neither rejecting it to the
     // page nor closing the window it is reporting into is survivable.
     for (const [id, approval] of Object.entries(pendingApprovals)) {
-        const rejection =
+        const rejection = abandonedResult(
-            approval.type === "tx" || approval.type === "sign"
+            approval,
-                ? {
+            APPROVAL_REJECTED_CODE,
-                      error: {
+            APPROVAL_REJECTED_MESSAGE,
-                          code: 4001,
+        );
-                          message: "User rejected the request.",
-                      },
-                  }
-                : { approved: false, remember: false };
         if (!settleApproval(id, rejection)) continue;
         if (approval.windowId) {
             windowsApi.remove(approval.windowId, () => {
@@ -831,21 +1047,19 @@ startBackgroundJobs();
 // verify and broadcast it is waiting on, so a user closing an apparently-hung
 // window is an ordinary event with an attempt already in flight behind it.
 // settleApproval() refuses those, which leaves the attempt to report its real
-// outcome to the page.
+// outcome to the page — and the window is recorded as gone, so that an attempt
+// which then fails retryably settles instead of waiting in a window that no
+// longer exists.
 if (windowsApi && windowsApi.onRemoved) {
     windowsApi.onRemoved.addListener((windowId) => {
         for (const [id, approval] of Object.entries(pendingApprovals)) {
             if (approval.windowId !== windowId) continue;
-            const rejection =
+            const rejection = abandonedResult(
-                approval.type === "tx" || approval.type === "sign"
+                approval,
-                    ? {
+                APPROVAL_REJECTED_CODE,
-                          error: {
+                APPROVAL_REJECTED_MESSAGE,
-                              code: 4001,
+            );
-                              message: "User rejected the request.",
+            if (!settleApproval(id, rejection)) approval.windowClosed = true;
-                          },
-                      }
-                    : { approved: false, remember: false };
-            settleApproval(id, rejection);
         }
     });
 }
@@ -959,7 +1173,7 @@ runtime.onMessage.addListener((msg, sender, sendResponse) => {
             sendResponse({
                 error: outcome.error,
                 retryable: outcome.retryable,
-                stage: TX_STAGE_SIGN,
+                stage: outcome.stage,
             });
             return false;
         }
@@ -975,8 +1189,15 @@ runtime.onMessage.addListener((msg, sender, sendResponse) => {
         }
 
         (async () => {
+            // The chain this attempt is on, read once. Verification below
+            // refuses an artifact signed for any other chain, and the nonce
+            // record is both consulted and written under this one, so a
+            // network switch part-way through cannot make the check and the
+            // record disagree about which chain the nonce was spent on.
+            let chainId;
             try {
                 await loadState();
+                chainId = currentNetwork().chainId;
                 const activeAddress = await getActiveAddress();
                 // An address switch between approval and signing refuses. The
                 // approval named one account; signing from whichever account
@@ -999,7 +1220,7 @@ runtime.onMessage.addListener((msg, sender, sendResponse) => {
                     msg.rawSignedTx,
                     approval.approvedTx,
                     approval.approvedFrom,
-                    currentNetwork().chainId,
+                    chainId,
                 );
             } catch (e) {
                 // A signed transaction that is not the approved one is not
@@ -1019,7 +1240,31 @@ runtime.onMessage.addListener((msg, sender, sendResponse) => {
                 sendResponse({
                     error: outcome.error,
                     retryable: outcome.retryable,
-                    stage: TX_STAGE_VERIFY,
+                    stage: outcome.stage,
+                });
+                return;
+            }
+
+            // A nonce this worker has already broadcast for this address on
+            // this chain. The node is not asked: it has answered once already,
+            // and the wallet holding the receipt of that answer is what makes
+            // this failure one the user can be told did not reach the network.
+            // A nonce spent on another chain is not spent here — the chains
+            // count separately, and refusing across them would block ordinary
+            // use with a message that is not true.
+            const nonce = approvedNonce(approval.approvedTx);
+            const spent = broadcastNoncesFor(chainId, approval.approvedFrom);
+            if (nonce !== null && spent.has(nonce)) {
+                const outcome = describeTxFailure(TX_STAGE_NONCE, null);
+                settleApproval(
+                    msg.id,
+                    { error: { message: outcome.error } },
+                    { holdsClaim: true },
+                );
+                sendResponse({
+                    error: outcome.error,
+                    retryable: outcome.retryable,
+                    stage: outcome.stage,
                 });
                 return;
             }
@@ -1027,6 +1272,7 @@ runtime.onMessage.addListener((msg, sender, sendResponse) => {
             try {
                 const provider = getProvider(state.rpcUrl);
                 const tx = await provider.broadcastTransaction(msg.rawSignedTx);
+                if (nonce !== null) spent.add(nonce);
                 settleApproval(
                     msg.id,
                     { txHash: tx.hash },
@@ -1039,6 +1285,11 @@ runtime.onMessage.addListener((msg, sender, sendResponse) => {
                 // tell a transaction that never left from one already in the
                 // mempool. The page has been given its outcome for this
                 // request; a second attempt would report a second one.
+                //
+                // Unless the node blamed the nonce, which is the one answer
+                // that says plainly it did not take the transaction:
+                // describeTxFailure() reclassifies that, and the stage it
+                // returns is the one reported.
                 const outcome = describeTxFailure(TX_STAGE_BROADCAST, e);
                 settleApproval(
                     msg.id,
@@ -1048,7 +1299,7 @@ runtime.onMessage.addListener((msg, sender, sendResponse) => {
                 sendResponse({
                     error: outcome.error,
                     retryable: outcome.retryable,
-                    stage: TX_STAGE_BROADCAST,
+                    stage: outcome.stage,
                 });
             }
         })();

src/shared/approvalVerify.js

@@ -602,6 +602,12 @@ const TX_STAGE_BROADCAST = "broadcast";
 // may yet succeed, so the one thing the popup must not say is "start again
 // from the site".
 const TX_STAGE_INFLIGHT = "inflight";
+// A transaction refused for a nonce that is already spoken for, either by the
+// node's own answer or by this wallet's record of what it has broadcast. It is
+// the one broadcast-stage failure that is not ambiguous: the transaction was
+// not taken, so the user is told it did not reach the network and to send it
+// again, rather than being warned that it might already be out there.
+const TX_STAGE_NONCE = "nonce";
 
 function errorText(err) {
     if (typeof err === "string" && err !== "") return err;
@@ -611,6 +617,59 @@ function errorText(err) {
     return "The transaction could not be sent.";
 }
 
+// Every string a failure might carry its reason in. ethers reports the node's
+// own words in `shortMessage`, but a JSON-RPC error it could not classify is
+// nested under `error` or `info.error` with the node's message intact, and the
+// classification below has to see that too.
+function failureTexts(err) {
+    if (typeof err === "string") return [err];
+    if (!err || typeof err !== "object") return [];
+    const texts = [];
+    for (const text of [err.shortMessage, err.message, err.reason]) {
+        if (text) texts.push(String(text));
+    }
+    const nested = err.error || (err.info && err.info.error);
+    if (nested && nested.message) texts.push(String(nested.message));
+    return texts;
+}
+
+// What the Ethereum clients say when a transaction's nonce is already spoken
+// for: either it is below the account's next nonce, or another transaction is
+// sitting in the pool at that nonce and this one did not outbid it. Either way
+// the node answered, and its answer was that it did not take this transaction.
+//
+// "already known" is deliberately absent. A node that says it knows the
+// transaction has it, so that transaction did reach the network and the
+// ambiguous broadcast wording is the correct one for it.
+const NONCE_COLLISION_PATTERNS = [
+    /nonce too low/i,
+    /nonce has already been used/i,
+    /invalid nonce/i,
+    /oldnonce/i,
+    /replacement transaction underpriced/i,
+    /replacement fee too low/i,
+];
+
+// ethers' own classification of the same two conditions.
+const NONCE_COLLISION_CODES = ["NONCE_EXPIRED", "REPLACEMENT_UNDERPRICED"];
+
+// Whether a failed send is a nonce collision.
+function isNonceCollision(err) {
+    if (!err) return false;
+    if (err.code && NONCE_COLLISION_CODES.includes(err.code)) return true;
+    return failureTexts(err).some((text) =>
+        NONCE_COLLISION_PATTERNS.some((pattern) => pattern.test(text)),
+    );
+}
+
+// What both the requesting page and the popup are told about a nonce
+// collision. The node's own words ("nonce too low") are a fragment and are
+// replaced rather than passed through: they are not a sentence, and they say
+// less than the wallet knows.
+const NONCE_COLLISION_MESSAGE =
+    "The transaction was not sent, because its nonce had already been used" +
+    " by another transaction.";
+
 // What the background does with a pending transaction approval after a failed
 // attempt: what it tells the popup, and whether the approval is spent
 // (resolved to the requesting page as an error and deleted) or left standing
@@ -627,12 +686,31 @@ function errorText(err) {
 //    that never left from one that is already in the mempool. The approval is
 //    spent and the requesting page has been given its outcome; a second
 //    attempt against it would report a second outcome for one request.
+//  - nonce: terminal too, and the one case where the wallet does know the
+//    transaction never left. The approval carries a nonce that is spent, so
+//    the artifact signed against it can never be accepted and the user is told
+//    to send it again from the site.
+//
+// The stage comes back out because a broadcast failure the node blamed on the
+// nonce is reclassified here; the caller reports the stage this returns rather
+// than the one it passed in.
 function describeTxFailure(stage, err) {
+    if (
+        stage === TX_STAGE_NONCE ||
+        (stage === TX_STAGE_BROADCAST && isNonceCollision(err))
+    ) {
+        return {
+            error: NONCE_COLLISION_MESSAGE,
+            retryable: false,
+            spendApproval: true,
+            stage: TX_STAGE_NONCE,
+        };
+    }
     const error = errorText(err);
     const retryable =
         stage === TX_STAGE_SIGN ||
         (stage === TX_STAGE_VERIFY && failureIsRetryable(err));
-    return { error, retryable, spendApproval: !retryable };
+    return { error, retryable, spendApproval: !retryable, stage };
 }
 
 // What the popup shows and does after the background reports a failed signing
@@ -642,14 +720,20 @@ function describeTxFailure(stage, err) {
 //
 // A failed broadcast gets its own wording: the transaction may already be on
 // the network, so telling the user to start again from the site is exactly the
-// wrong instruction.
+// wrong instruction. A nonce collision is the exception to that exception —
+// the transaction demonstrably did not go out, and saying it might have would
+// send the user hunting for a transaction that does not exist.
 function describeSigningFailure(response, fallbackMessage) {
     let message = (response && response.error) || fallbackMessage;
     if (!/[.!?]$/.test(message)) message += ".";
     const retryable = !!(response && response.retryable);
     const stage = response && response.stage;
     if (!retryable) {
-        if (stage === TX_STAGE_BROADCAST) {
+        if (stage === TX_STAGE_NONCE) {
+            message +=
+                " The transaction did not reach the network." +
+                " Please send it again from the site.";
+        } else if (stage === TX_STAGE_BROADCAST) {
             message +=
                 " The transaction may still have reached the network." +
                 " Check the account before sending it again.";
@@ -675,9 +759,11 @@ module.exports = {
     assertWithinCeilings,
     sameAddress,
     failureIsRetryable,
+    isNonceCollision,
     describeTxFailure,
     describeSigningFailure,
     ApprovalMismatchError,
+    NONCE_COLLISION_MESSAGE,
     ALLOWED_TX_TYPES,
     SERIALIZED_FIELDS,
     FORBIDDEN_FIELDS,
@@ -686,6 +772,7 @@ module.exports = {
     TX_STAGE_VERIFY,
     TX_STAGE_BROADCAST,
     TX_STAGE_INFLIGHT,
+    TX_STAGE_NONCE,
     MAX_GAS_LIMIT,
     MAX_FEE_PER_GAS,
 };

tests/approvalVerify.test.js

@@ -14,8 +14,10 @@ const {
     assertWithinCeilings,
     sameAddress,
     failureIsRetryable,
+    isNonceCollision,
     describeTxFailure,
     describeSigningFailure,
+    NONCE_COLLISION_MESSAGE,
     ALLOWED_TX_TYPES,
     SERIALIZED_FIELDS,
     FORBIDDEN_FIELDS,
@@ -23,6 +25,7 @@ const {
     TX_STAGE_SIGN,
     TX_STAGE_VERIFY,
     TX_STAGE_BROADCAST,
+    TX_STAGE_NONCE,
     MAX_GAS_LIMIT,
     MAX_FEE_PER_GAS,
 } = require("../src/shared/approvalVerify");
@@ -1191,7 +1194,6 @@ describe("signing failure and retry", () => {
             "already known",
             "timeout of 30000ms exceeded",
             "could not coalesce error",
-            "replacement transaction underpriced",
         ]) {
             const outcome = describeTxFailure(
                 TX_STAGE_BROADCAST,
@@ -1199,10 +1201,76 @@ describe("signing failure and retry", () => {
             );
             expect(outcome.retryable).toBe(false);
             expect(outcome.spendApproval).toBe(true);
+            expect(outcome.stage).toBe(TX_STAGE_BROADCAST);
             expect(outcome.error).toBe(message);
         }
     });
 
+    // The one broadcast failure that is not ambiguous. The node answered, and
+    // its answer was that the nonce was already spoken for, so this
+    // transaction is not in a mempool anywhere.
+    test("a nonce the node refused is classified however it was worded", () => {
+        for (const err of [
+            new Error("nonce too low"),
+            new Error("replacement transaction underpriced"),
+            Object.assign(new Error("could not coalesce error"), {
+                code: "NONCE_EXPIRED",
+            }),
+            Object.assign(new Error("could not coalesce error"), {
+                code: "REPLACEMENT_UNDERPRICED",
+            }),
+            // The shape ethers hands up when it could not classify the node's
+            // error itself: the node's own words are nested underneath.
+            Object.assign(new Error("could not coalesce error"), {
+                info: { error: { code: -32000, message: "OldNonce" } },
+            }),
+        ]) {
+            const outcome = describeTxFailure(TX_STAGE_BROADCAST, err);
+            expect(
+                describeSigningFailure(
+                    outcome,
+                    "The transaction could not be sent.",
+                ).message,
+            ).toMatch(/did not reach the network/);
+            expect(outcome.retryable).toBe(false);
+            expect(outcome.spendApproval).toBe(true);
+            expect(outcome.error).toBe(NONCE_COLLISION_MESSAGE);
+            expect(outcome.stage).toBe(TX_STAGE_NONCE);
+            expect(isNonceCollision(err)).toBe(true);
+        }
+    });
+
+    // A node that says it knows the transaction has it, so it did reach the
+    // network and the ambiguous wording is the correct one.
+    test("already known is not a nonce collision", () => {
+        const err = new Error("already known");
+        const outcome = describeTxFailure(TX_STAGE_BROADCAST, err);
+        expect(
+            describeSigningFailure(
+                outcome,
+                "The transaction could not be sent.",
+            ).message,
+        ).toMatch(/may still have reached the network/);
+        expect(outcome.stage).toBe(TX_STAGE_BROADCAST);
+        expect(isNonceCollision(err)).toBe(false);
+    });
+
+    test("a nonce collision says the transaction did not reach the network", () => {
+        const outcome = describeTxFailure(
+            TX_STAGE_BROADCAST,
+            new Error("nonce too low"),
+        );
+        const copy = describeSigningFailure(
+            outcome,
+            "The transaction could not be sent.",
+        );
+        expect(copy.retryable).toBe(false);
+        expect(copy.message).toMatch(/did not reach the network/);
+        expect(copy.message).not.toMatch(/may still have reached the network/);
+        expect(copy.message).toMatch(/Please send it again from the site\.$/);
+        expect(copy.message).toMatch(/^[A-Z].*\.$/);
+    });
+
     test("a failed broadcast does not tell the user to send it again", () => {
         const outcome = describeSigningFailure(
             {

tests/backgroundApproval.test.js

@@ -30,6 +30,8 @@ const RECIPIENT = "0x66133E8ea0f5D1d612D2502a968757D1048c214a";
 
 const ORIGIN = "https://dapp.example";
 const HOSTNAME = "dapp.example";
+// A page the wallet has never been connected to, whose requests are refused.
+const UNCONNECTED_ORIGIN = "https://stranger.example";
 const EXT_URL = "chrome-extension://autistmask/";
 
 // What the dApp asks for: no nonce, no gas, no fees. This is the shape that
@@ -51,10 +53,16 @@ const MESSAGE = "0x48656c6c6f204175746973744d61736b";
 // The transaction the background populates and the approval screen displays.
 // The nonce is a parameter because the duplicate case turns on two artifacts
 // differing in a field the dApp fixed nothing for.
-function populated(nonce) {
+// The two chains the tests switch between, as both forms the code uses: the
+// hex chain id the wallet's network record carries, and the number the node
+// and the signed artifact carry.
+const MAINNET = { hex: "0x1", num: 1 };
+const SEPOLIA = { hex: "0xaa36a7", num: 11155111 };
+
+function populated(nonce, chainId) {
     return {
         type: 2,
-        chainId: 1,
+        chainId: chainId || MAINNET.num,
         nonce,
         gasLimit: 100000n,
         maxFeePerGas: 2000000000n,
@@ -65,17 +73,17 @@ function populated(nonce) {
     };
 }
 
-function signedAtNonce(nonce, withWallet) {
+function signedAtNonce(nonce, withWallet, chainId) {
-    return (withWallet || signer).signTransaction(populated(nonce));
+    return (withWallet || signer).signTransaction(populated(nonce, chainId));
 }
 
 // The node the background populates against. Its answers are the numbers the
 // approval screen shows, so they are also the numbers every artifact below is
 // signed at.
-function fakeProvider(broadcastTransaction, overrides) {
+function fakeProvider(broadcastTransaction, overrides, chainId) {
     return {
         broadcastTransaction,
-        getNetwork: async () => Network.from(1),
+        getNetwork: async () => Network.from(chainId || MAINNET.num),
         getTransactionCount: async () => NONCE,
         estimateGas: async () => 100000n,
         getFeeData: async () => ({
@@ -111,14 +119,20 @@ function loadBackground(options) {
     const broadcastTransaction = jest.fn();
     const loadState = jest.fn(opts.loadState || (async () => {}));
 
+    // The network the wallet is on, which the tests switch under a pending
+    // approval. The node the transaction is populated against is on the same
+    // one, as it would be: switching networks switches the RPC endpoint too.
+    let chain = MAINNET;
+
     jest.doMock("../src/shared/state", () => ({
         state: { rpcUrl: "https://rpc.invalid", wallets: [] },
         loadState,
         saveState: jest.fn(async () => {}),
-        currentNetwork: () => ({ chainId: "0x1" }),
+        currentNetwork: () => ({ chainId: chain.hex }),
     }));
     jest.doMock("../src/shared/balances", () => ({
-        getProvider: () => fakeProvider(broadcastTransaction, opts.provider),
+        getProvider: () =>
+            fakeProvider(broadcastTransaction, opts.provider, chain.num),
         refreshBalances: jest.fn(async () => {}),
     }));
     jest.doMock("../src/shared/phishingDomains", () => ({
@@ -170,7 +184,9 @@ function loadBackground(options) {
             getLastFocused: (cb) => cb(null),
             create: (options2, cb) => {
                 created.push(options2);
-                cb({ id: created.length });
+                // A browser that answers with no window at all. The approval
+                // then has no window it can ever be answered in.
+                cb(opts.noWindow ? undefined : { id: created.length });
             },
             remove: (id, cb) => {
                 removed.push(id);
@@ -204,8 +220,12 @@ function loadBackground(options) {
 
     // Raise a pending transaction approval the way a dApp does, and dig the
     // approval id back out of the popup URL the background opened.
-    function requestTx(txParams) {
+    function requestTx(txParams, origin) {
         let rpcResult = null;
+        // The window this request opens, if it opens one. A request refused
+        // before an approval is raised opens none, and the window belonging to
+        // some other request must not be handed back as this one's.
+        const windowIndex = created.length;
         const sendResponse = jest.fn((r) => {
             rpcResult = r;
         });
@@ -215,11 +235,16 @@ function loadBackground(options) {
                 method: "eth_sendTransaction",
                 params: [txParams || TX_PARAMS],
             },
-            { origin: ORIGIN },
+            { origin: origin || ORIGIN },
             sendResponse,
         );
         return {
-            id: () => new URL(created[0].url).searchParams.get("approval"),
+            id: () =>
+                created.length > windowIndex
+                    ? new URL(created[windowIndex].url).searchParams.get(
+                          "approval",
+                      )
+                    : null,
             result: () => rpcResult,
         };
     }
@@ -269,6 +294,10 @@ function loadBackground(options) {
         setActiveAddress: (address) => {
             persisted.activeAddress = address;
         },
+        // The user switching network in the toolbar popup.
+        setNetwork: (network) => {
+            chain = network;
+        },
         fromPopup: { url: EXT_URL + "src/popup/index.html" },
     };
 }
@@ -444,6 +473,318 @@ describe("one approval, one broadcast", () => {
     });
 });
 
+// Populating the transaction before the approval window opens is what makes
+// the displayed object the verified object. It also fixes the nonce before the
+// user has answered anything: two requests populated concurrently take the
+// same nonce from a node that has seen neither of them broadcast, and the
+// second can then never be sent, because the only way to give it a fresh nonce
+// is to populate it again after the user has read the old one off the screen.
+// So the second request is refused while the first is unanswered.
+describe("one transaction approval at a time", () => {
+    test("a second eth_sendTransaction while one is pending is refused before it takes a nonce", async () => {
+        const getTransactionCount = jest.fn(async () => NONCE);
+        const bg = loadBackground({ provider: { getTransactionCount } });
+
+        const first = bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+        expect(first.id()).toBeTruthy();
+        expect(getTransactionCount).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1);
+
+        const second = bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+
+        expect(second.result()).toEqual({
+            error: {
+                code: -32002,
+                message: expect.stringMatching(
+                    /one transaction at a time.+already in progress/,
+                ),
+            },
+        });
+        // Where the refusal happened matters as much as that it happened: no
+        // second window, and the node was never asked for a second nonce.
+        expect(bg.created).toHaveLength(1);
+        expect(getTransactionCount).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1);
+
+        // The refusal leaves the pending approval untouched, and it still
+        // sends.
+        bg.broadcastTransaction.mockResolvedValue({ hash: "0xfeed" });
+        bg.send(
+            {
+                type: "AUTISTMASK_TX_RESPONSE",
+                id: first.id(),
+                approved: true,
+                rawSignedTx: await signedAtNonce(NONCE),
+            },
+            { url: bg.fromPopup.url },
+        );
+        await settle();
+        expect(first.result()).toEqual({ result: "0xfeed" });
+    });
+
+    // The slot is only defensible if the wallet was going to raise an approval
+    // anyway. Taken any earlier, a request the wallet refuses outright still
+    // holds it, and any page at all — connected or not — can deny the user's
+    // own transactions for as long as it keeps asking.
+    test("a request the wallet refuses does not take the slot from the connected site", async () => {
+        const bg = loadBackground();
+
+        // Both delivered before either reaches its first suspension point,
+        // which is the interleaving the slot exists for.
+        const stranger = bg.requestTx(TX_PARAMS, UNCONNECTED_ORIGIN);
+        const connected = bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+
+        expect(stranger.result()).toEqual({
+            error: { code: 4100, message: "Unauthorized" },
+        });
+        // The connected site's transaction was raised, not refused as one the
+        // user already has in progress.
+        expect(connected.result()).toBeNull();
+        expect(connected.id()).toBeTruthy();
+        expect(bg.created).toHaveLength(1);
+    });
+
+    // The user closes an approval window that looks hung while the attempt
+    // behind it is still running, and that attempt then fails in a way that
+    // would normally leave the approval standing for a retry. There is no
+    // window left to retry in, so leaving it standing answers the requesting
+    // page never — and holds the slot for the life of the worker with it.
+    test("an approval whose window closed under a failed attempt is answered, and frees the next request", async () => {
+        const stalled = deferred();
+        const bg = loadBackground({
+            loadState: async () => {
+                await stalled.promise;
+                throw new Error("The wallet data could not be read.");
+            },
+        });
+
+        const first = bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+        bg.send(
+            {
+                type: "AUTISTMASK_TX_RESPONSE",
+                id: first.id(),
+                approved: true,
+                rawSignedTx: await signedAtNonce(NONCE),
+            },
+            { url: bg.fromPopup.url },
+        );
+        await settle();
+
+        // The attempt owns the approval, so closing the window does not settle
+        // it: the attempt may yet broadcast, and it is the one that reports.
+        bg.closeWindow(1);
+        await settle();
+        expect(first.result()).toBeNull();
+
+        stalled.resolve();
+        await settle();
+        expect(first.result()).toEqual({
+            error: { code: 4001, message: "User rejected the request." },
+        });
+
+        const second = bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+        expect(second.result()).toBeNull();
+        expect(second.id()).toBeTruthy();
+        expect(bg.created).toHaveLength(2);
+    });
+
+    // An approval with no window is one nothing can ever answer.
+    test("a request whose approval window cannot be opened is answered rather than left waiting", async () => {
+        const bg = loadBackground({ noWindow: true });
+
+        const first = bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+        expect(first.result()).toEqual({
+            error: {
+                code: -32603,
+                message: expect.stringMatching(
+                    /could not open its approval window/,
+                ),
+            },
+        });
+
+        // And it did not take the slot with it.
+        const second = bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+        expect(second.result()).toEqual({
+            error: {
+                code: -32603,
+                message: expect.stringMatching(
+                    /could not open its approval window/,
+                ),
+            },
+        });
+    });
+
+    test("an answered approval frees the next request", async () => {
+        const bg = loadBackground();
+        const first = bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+
+        // The user closes the approval window, which rejects it.
+        bg.closeWindow(1);
+        await settle();
+        expect(first.result()).toEqual({
+            error: { code: 4001, message: "User rejected the request." },
+        });
+
+        const second = bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+        expect(second.id()).toBeTruthy();
+        expect(bg.created).toHaveLength(2);
+    });
+
+    test("a signature request is not held up by a pending transaction", async () => {
+        const bg = loadBackground();
+        bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+
+        // A signature consumes no nonce, so it has nothing to collide with.
+        const signing = bg.requestSign();
+        await settle();
+        expect(signing.id()).toBeTruthy();
+        expect(signing.result()).toBeNull();
+        expect(bg.created).toHaveLength(2);
+    });
+});
+
+// A nonce collision found before the transaction reaches the network is the
+// one send failure the wallet can speak about with certainty. The user is told
+// it did not go out and to send it again, rather than being warned it might
+// already be on the chain — which would send them looking for a transaction
+// that does not exist, and stop them retrying the one that never went.
+describe("a nonce collision is reported as a transaction that did not go out", () => {
+    test("a broadcast the node refused for the nonce is not reported as possibly sent", async () => {
+        const bg = loadBackground();
+        const pending = bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+
+        bg.broadcastTransaction.mockRejectedValue(
+            Object.assign(new Error("nonce too low"), {
+                code: "NONCE_EXPIRED",
+            }),
+        );
+        const answer = bg.send(
+            {
+                type: "AUTISTMASK_TX_RESPONSE",
+                id: pending.id(),
+                approved: true,
+                rawSignedTx: await signedAtNonce(NONCE),
+            },
+            { url: bg.fromPopup.url },
+        );
+        await settle();
+
+        expect(answer.sendResponse).toHaveBeenCalledWith({
+            error: expect.stringMatching(/nonce had already been used/),
+            retryable: false,
+            stage: "nonce",
+        });
+        expect(pending.result()).toEqual({
+            error: {
+                message: expect.stringMatching(
+                    /transaction was not sent, because its nonce/,
+                ),
+            },
+        });
+    });
+
+    test("a nonce this wallet already broadcast is refused without asking the node again", async () => {
+        const bg = loadBackground();
+        const first = bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+
+        bg.broadcastTransaction.mockResolvedValue({ hash: "0xfeed" });
+        bg.send(
+            {
+                type: "AUTISTMASK_TX_RESPONSE",
+                id: first.id(),
+                approved: true,
+                rawSignedTx: await signedAtNonce(NONCE),
+            },
+            { url: bg.fromPopup.url },
+        );
+        await settle();
+        expect(first.result()).toEqual({ result: "0xfeed" });
+
+        // The stubbed node still reports NONCE as the next nonce — a pending
+        // count that lags a broadcast the node has already taken — so this
+        // second approval is populated at a nonce this worker has spent.
+        const second = bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+        const answer = bg.send(
+            {
+                type: "AUTISTMASK_TX_RESPONSE",
+                id: second.id(),
+                approved: true,
+                rawSignedTx: await signedAtNonce(NONCE),
+            },
+            { url: bg.fromPopup.url },
+        );
+        await settle();
+
+        expect(bg.broadcastTransaction).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1);
+        expect(answer.sendResponse).toHaveBeenCalledWith({
+            error: expect.stringMatching(/nonce had already been used/),
+            retryable: false,
+            stage: "nonce",
+        });
+        expect(second.result()).toEqual({
+            error: {
+                message: expect.stringMatching(/nonce had already been used/),
+            },
+        });
+    });
+
+    // Nonce spaces are per chain, and the wallet switches networks. A nonce
+    // this wallet spent on one chain says nothing about the same nonce on
+    // another — and low nonces overlap across chains as a matter of course, so
+    // a record that ignored the chain would refuse ordinary transactions,
+    // permanently and with a message that is not true of them.
+    test("a nonce spent on one chain is not refused on another", async () => {
+        const bg = loadBackground();
+
+        const first = bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+        bg.broadcastTransaction.mockResolvedValue({ hash: "0xfeed" });
+        bg.send(
+            {
+                type: "AUTISTMASK_TX_RESPONSE",
+                id: first.id(),
+                approved: true,
+                rawSignedTx: await signedAtNonce(NONCE),
+            },
+            { url: bg.fromPopup.url },
+        );
+        await settle();
+        expect(first.result()).toEqual({ result: "0xfeed" });
+
+        // The user switches network. On this chain the address has sent
+        // nothing, so the node populates the next transaction at the same
+        // nonce — correctly.
+        bg.setNetwork(SEPOLIA);
+        const second = bg.requestTx();
+        await settle();
+        bg.broadcastTransaction.mockResolvedValue({ hash: "0xbeef" });
+        bg.send(
+            {
+                type: "AUTISTMASK_TX_RESPONSE",
+                id: second.id(),
+                approved: true,
+                rawSignedTx: await signedAtNonce(NONCE, undefined, SEPOLIA.num),
+            },
+            { url: bg.fromPopup.url },
+        );
+        await settle();
+
+        expect(bg.broadcastTransaction).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(2);
+        expect(second.result()).toEqual({ result: "0xbeef" });
+    });
+});
+
 // The approval carries the transaction the user was shown and the address it
 // was raised for, and the artifact is checked against both. Every case here is
 // one the old comparison — against the dApp's request, for the address that is