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

sign_psbt: pass elements flag to signature hash generation for liquid

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Jon Griffiths

70/100 · Adequate
sign_psbt: pass elements flag to signature hash generation for liquid

This is required for taproot, as Elements/Liquid use different hashing
and tweaking strategies in this case.
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides an explanatory body✓ Names security-relevant behavior explicitly
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit fixes how Blockstream Jade signs Liquid (Elements) Taproot transactions. Previously, the device used Bitcoin-style signature hashing for all networks, which is incorrect for Liquid Taproot. The fix passes a special 'Elements' flag when signing on Liquid so the signature hash matches Liquid's rules. Without this, signatures produced for Liquid Taproot transactions would be invalid or could potentially be produced using the wrong cryptographic formula, which in hardware wallets can sometimes lead to security issues like key leakage or signature-forgery attacks.

Recommended action

Treat as a correctness fix with possible security implications for Liquid Taproot users. Users signing Liquid Taproot transactions with affected firmware should upgrade. A security review should verify whether the prior behavior could lead to nonce reuse, weak signatures, or key leakage; if so, the project should issue a security advisory and coordinate CVE assignment.

Security signals we found

01

Cryptographic signing parameter changed for a specific network

02

Taproot/Elements-specific hashing and tweaking path activated

03

Commit message explicitly frames change as required for correctness

04

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

05

Patch is minimal (+2/-1) and targeted

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.