AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Informational 15 Bitcoin

test: add IPC submitBlock functional test

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by woltx

100/100 · Strong
test: add IPC submitBlock functional test

Test the new Mining.submitBlock IPC method:
- Invalid block (bad version) returns failure with reason
- Valid block (with a real mempool tx) is accepted and propagates
- Duplicate block returns failure with "duplicate" reason
- Witness commitment without coinbase witness nonce is rejected
(bad-witness-nonce-size), confirming no auto-fix behavior
- submitBlock then submitSolution: duplicate is accepted (submitSolution
returns true for already-known blocks)
- submitSolution then submitBlock interaction (duplicate)

Build candidate blocks from BlockTemplate data in the existing coinbase and
submission test, then exercise checkBlock(), submitSolution(), and
submitBlock() against those candidates. submitBlock() uses an isolated IPC
node for cases that would otherwise affect the main submitSolution() and
checkBlock() assertions.
✓ Descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Uses a recognizable type or scope✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Explains rationale or failure mode✓ Mentions testing or verification
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit only adds new automated tests for the Bitcoin Core IPC mining interface. It does not change any production node code, consensus rules, or network behavior. The tests verify that a new submitBlock IPC method correctly accepts valid blocks and rejects invalid, duplicate, or malformed ones. There is no security vulnerability here.

Recommended action

No action required. This is a test-only change and does not introduce or fix a security issue.

Security signals we found

No strong security signals were identified.

Risk score

Why this scored 15/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 0/30
Exploitability 0/25
Stealth signal 0/15
Affected reach 0/15
Confidence 10/10
Evidence quality 5/5
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.