AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Informational 19 Bitcoin

Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#36251: rest: add `generated` and `height` to spenttxouts JSON

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by merge-script

81/100 · Strong
Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#36251: rest: add `generated` and `height` to spenttxouts JSON

1566a4767afd3865ee466d1aa2ce8237cb5c27c1 rest: add generated and height to spenttxouts JSON (0xb10c)

Pull request description:

This adds the `generated` and `height` fields to the JSON REST endpoint `/rest/spenttxouts/BLOCKHASH.json` to match the prevout output of the getblock RPC with verbosity 3. The information for these fields is already available, but just was not exposed.

The binary and hex formats aren't changed (here) to not break backwards compatibility with consumers of these endpoints. See the discussion in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32540#issuecomment-5665279713

ACKs for top commit:
nervana21:
tACK 1566a4767afd3865ee466d1aa2ce8237cb5c27c1
willcl-ark:
ACK 1566a4767afd3865ee466d1aa2ce8237cb5c27c1
sedited:
ACK 1566a4767afd3865ee466d1aa2ce8237cb5c27c1

Tree-SHA512: e0f57baa75d9b5e941fdf87179f293209af2fab16a151011a788b7f459d10ce50cf8b8ee2acc4d352e032aa5c76cf0a32dfb959c860938b988645844a2e75675
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Links an issue, advisory, or supporting reference
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This change adds two extra pieces of information—whether a spent output came from a coinbase transaction and the block height at which it was created—to a Bitcoin Core REST API endpoint. It is a feature/parity improvement to make the REST output match an existing RPC output. There is no indication it fixes a security bug or introduces a vulnerability.

Recommended action

No security action required. Treat as a normal feature/documentation update during review or deployment.

Security signals we found

No strong security signals were identified.

Risk score

Why this scored 19/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 0/30
Exploitability 0/25
Stealth signal 0/15
Affected reach 5/15
Confidence 9/10
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.