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

Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#36261: test: cover PSBT unknown field merging

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by merge-script

91/100 · Strong
Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#36261: test: cover PSBT unknown field merging

21e4ea8134d8ca95416e065490d99f82be66bd67 test: cover PSBT unknown field merging (w0xlt)

Pull request description:

Continuing the work from #35310 gere in agreement with w0xlt

This PR adds functional coverage for combinepsbt preserving unknown PSBT fields across global, input, and output maps, as suggested [here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34893#issuecomment-4390043746).

The test covers both PSBTv0 and PSBTv2 by creating valid base PSBTs with `createpsbt`, injecting unknown key-value pairs into two copies, combining them, and asserting that all unknown fields are retained in the decoded result.

ACKs for top commit:
polespinasa:
ACK 21e4ea8134d8ca95416e065490d99f82be66bd67
nebula-21:
ACK 21e4ea8134d8ca95416e065490d99f82be66bd67
winterrdog:
tACK 21e4ea8134d8ca95416e065490d99f82be66bd67
w0xlt:
ACK 21e4ea8134d8ca95416e065490d99f82be66bd67

Tree-SHA512: 0f83ff2b9a519b613c6efaca3707bd8c6fdd00887370e16e927b19f059b751813737adc85ad81366f5c57b91226f56b3b0bdc996451f4d6bc9ec83aa4a189923
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Mentions testing or verification✓ Links an issue, advisory, or supporting reference
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit only adds a new automated test to Bitcoin Core. It checks that when two partially-signed Bitcoin transactions (PSBTs) are combined, any custom 'unknown' data fields attached to them are preserved correctly. There is no change to the actual Bitcoin Core software behavior—only test code was added.

Recommended action

No security action needed. This is a test-only change. Reviewers may optionally run the new functional test to confirm coverage.

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.