AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Moderate 57 Bitcoin

sign_tx: split out signing tx validation, add more checks

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Jon Griffiths

65/100 · Adequate
sign_tx: split out signing tx validation, add more checks

Also move the explicit fee fetching/validation into the split out
function.
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides an explanatory body
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit reorganizes how Blockstream Jade validates transaction data before signing. It moves several Liquid-network checks earlier in the process and adds new rules: a transaction output with no recipient script (typically a network fee) must now be unblinded, non-zero, use the network's official policy asset, and there can only be one such fee output. The change also prevents a transaction from being silently treated as a different network type (Bitcoin vs. Liquid). These are defensive hardening measures rather than a fix for a confirmed active attack.

Recommended action

Review the new `params_txn_validate()` logic for completeness and ensure it is invoked consistently for all signing paths, including any future multi-signature or PSBT flows. Consider whether additional tests cover the new fee-output rejection cases. No urgent patch is indicated by the commit alone.

Security signals we found

01

Hardening: earlier and stricter validation of transaction structure before signing

02

New check: fee outputs must be explicit/unblinded on Liquid

03

New check: fee outputs must use the network policy asset

04

New check: fee outputs must be non-zero

05

New check: only one fee output allowed

06

Refactor: fee extraction moved from output validation to initial transaction parsing

07

No CVE, advisory, or researcher attribution present in commit or supplied references

Risk score

Why this scored 57/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 18/30
Exploitability 12/25
Stealth signal 8/15
Affected reach 10/15
Confidence 6/10
Evidence quality 3/5
Human-validated context

Community notes

Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.

No validated notes yet.

The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.