AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Informational 18 Bitcoin

rpcclient: add typed SubmitPackage method

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Elle Mouton

68/100 · Adequate
rpcclient: add typed SubmitPackage method

Add SubmitPackage / SubmitPackageAsync / FutureSubmitPackageResult,
wrapping the submitpackage RPC the same way TestMempoolAccept wraps
testmempoolaccept: serialize the topologically-sorted package to hex,
issue the btcjson submitpackage command, and decode the response into
btcjson.SubmitPackageResult (which already maps the raw fields to
higher-level types via its UnmarshalJSON).

This keeps the multi-backend RPC layering intact so callers (e.g.
btcwallet's chain.Interface) can invoke a typed method instead of a
RawRequest. submitpackage is a Bitcoin Core RPC (v24+); btcd has no
server handler for it.
✓ Descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides detailed explanatory context
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit adds a new client-side method called SubmitPackage to btcd's RPC client. It does not change any server-side code, mempool logic, or consensus rules. It simply lets programs ask a Bitcoin Core node (version 24+) to submit a group of related transactions using an existing Bitcoin Core RPC. There is no obvious security vulnerability in the change itself.

Recommended action

No security action required. Reviewers may optionally verify that btcjson.NewJsonSubmitPackageCmd and btcjson.SubmitPackageResult handle the optional maxfeerate/maxburnamount arguments correctly, but this is a routine feature addition.

Security signals we found

01

No server-side handler added; only RPC client wrapper

02

Input validation limits transaction count to 1-25

03

Backend version gating prevents calls to unsupported backends

04

No cryptographic, consensus, or mempool logic changes

05

No unsafe deserialization or memory handling introduced

Risk score

Why this scored 18/100

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