AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Moderate 59 Bitcoin

fix(legacy): Improve handling of value overflows.

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Andrew Kozlik

57/100 · Thin
fix(legacy): Improve handling of value overflows.

[no changelog]
✓ Descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Uses a recognizable type or scope! No meaningful explanatory body
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit fixes several numeric overflow bugs in the older Trezor One (legacy) firmware. The most user-visible issue was a fee-rate display overflow: when a transaction used extremely large input amounts, multiplying the fee by 100 to show decimal places could wrap around to a tiny-looking fee, potentially tricking a user into approving a much higher fee than shown. The patch also prevents overflow when summing duplicate NEM mosaic quantities and stops BIP-32 child derivation once the maximum derivation depth is reached. A comment-only change notes that PINs can be up to 50 characters, but no code behavior was altered there.

Recommended action

Treat as a security hardening patch for legacy Trezor One firmware. Users on legacy firmware should upgrade to a release containing this commit. Review whether the fee-rate overflow could be combined with social engineering to induce overpayment, and consider additional input validation upstream for abnormally large input amounts.

Security signals we found

01

Integer overflow in fee-rate computation could misrepresent transaction fees on device screen

02

BIP-32 depth overflow guard prevents pathological key derivation edge case

03

NEM mosaic quantity overflow now returns failure instead of silently wrapping

04

New regression test test_fee_rate_overflow targets the legacy fee-rate overflow

05

No changelog entry suggests low-profile hardening fix

Risk score

Why this scored 59/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 18/30
Exploitability 12/25
Stealth signal 8/15
Affected reach 10/15
Confidence 7/10
Evidence quality 4/5
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.