SKYBITDev3

This is still an important issue. Maybe the guides should advise developers of new tokens to add withdraw functions, e.g. somewhere in https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/5.x-rc/erc20.

Is there any working syntax or workaround?

Try my solution that I've just posted at https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/issues/9196?#issuecomment-2002042848

How is the progress with this issue?

Thanks for checking @ernestognw . You are right - the error was caused by passing an address where there isn't a forwarder. But then there should be a reversion with...

> having an admin that can change the value is to big of a risk to have. In light of the recent events you may disagree. Such superuser risks are...

> 1 immutable forwarder per contract remains valid (and its benefits). But I do recognize the need of customizing it (or revoke it) So how can the forwarder address be...

OK, though how about for non-upgradeable contracts? e.g.: ```solidity // SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT pragma solidity ^0.8.23; import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20.sol"; import "@openzeppelin/contracts/access/AccessControl.sol"; import "@openzeppelin/contracts/metatx/ERC2771Context.sol"; contract MyToken is ERC20, AccessControl, ERC2771Context { constructor(address adminAddress,...