AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Informational 23 Monero

fix: sorting of transactions (#3494)

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by cyan

88/100 · Strong
fix: sorting of transactions (#3494)

* fix: zcash address for exchange

* fix: honour the restore height the user entered

- Make Zcash rescan work in both directions by resetting sync from the new birth height
- Keep the entered height when restoring a wallet from keys
- Tolerate grouping separators in typed restore heights

* fix: sorting of transactions
fix: tx fee for outgoing transactions

---------

Co-authored-by: Vik Sharma <vik@cakewallet.com>
Co-authored-by: Omar Hatem <omarh.ismail1@gmail.com>
✓ Descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Uses a recognizable type or scope✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Links an issue, advisory, or supporting reference
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This update fixes how Cake Wallet displays Zcash transactions. Previously, outgoing transaction fees were shown as zero and transaction timestamps could be wrong or missing. The patch makes fees show the real network fee and improves date/time handling for transactions. There is no direct evidence in the commit of a security vulnerability being exploited, but incorrect fee and time data could mislead users or cause accounting problems.

Recommended action

Treat as a routine bug-fix update. Users relying on accurate Zcash transaction history and fees should update. No immediate security response is indicated by the diff alone. Review the zkool2 dependency changelog for any related security fixes, as the bump may include additional changes not shown.

Security signals we found

01

Incorrect fee display could lead to user misrepresentation of transaction cost

02

Incorrect or missing transaction timestamps could affect transaction ordering/auditing

03

Dependency bump to newer zkool2 commit without disclosed security relevance

Risk score

Why this scored 23/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 4/30
Exploitability 2/25
Stealth signal 3/15
Affected reach 5/15
Confidence 6/10
Evidence quality 3/5
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.