AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Low 34 Monero

fix dogecoin transaction size calculation (#2570)

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Serhii

53/100 · Thin
fix dogecoin transaction size calculation (#2570)
✓ Descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Links an issue, advisory, or supporting reference! No meaningful explanatory body
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit fixes how Dogecoin transaction fees are calculated in Cake Wallet. Previously, the app likely relied on a Bitcoin-style size estimate that doesn't match Dogecoin's typical transaction structure. The change adds a Dogecoin-specific formula to estimate transaction size (and therefore fee) more accurately. An incorrect size estimate could lead to users paying too much or too little in fees, which in extreme cases can cause transactions to get stuck or be delayed.

Recommended action

Treat as a routine correctness fix. Review whether the new constants (180 bytes/input, 34 bytes/output, 10 bytes overhead) are accurate for the Dogecoin transaction types the wallet produces (P2PKH, P2SH, etc.) and verify fee edge cases through testing. No immediate security response is indicated by the diff alone.

Security signals we found

01

Incorrect transaction-size estimation can cause overpayment or underpayment of miner fees

02

Underpayment of fees can lead to transaction stuck/mempool eviction, degrading wallet reliability

03

No explicit security framing, CVE, or exploit code present in the commit

04

No vendor-authored security advisory or researcher attribution in the commit

Risk score

Why this scored 34/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 8/30
Exploitability 5/25
Stealth signal 6/15
Affected reach 7/15
Confidence 5/10
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.