AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Moderate 64 Bitcoin

Merge pull request #773 from scgbckbone/bugfix/bip322-por-foreign-inputs-public

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by doc-hex

73/100 · Adequate
Merge pull request #773 from scgbckbone/bugfix/bip322-por-foreign-inputs-public

bugfix: reject foreign inputs from BIP322 proofs of reserves
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides an explanatory body✓ Links an issue, advisory, or supporting reference
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This update fixes a bug in COLDCARD's handling of BIP-322 Proof of Reserves (POR). A maliciously crafted proof could include a foreign (not owned by the device) Bitcoin input disguised to look like the device's own input using a fake key path and a partial signature. Before the fix, the device might have accepted such a foreign input in a POR, potentially allowing someone to falsely inflate or manipulate a proof of reserves. After the fix, the device rejects any POR that contains inputs it is not actually going to sign, beyond the required first input.

Recommended action

Apply this patch and ensure BIP-322 POR proofs are re-tested against the new regression tests. Users relying on Proof of Reserves should upgrade once the release containing this fix is available.

Security signals we found

01

BIP-322 Proof of Reserves foreign-input bypass

02

Forged key-path metadata and partial-signature spoofing

03

Insufficient ownership validation in PSBT input processing

04

New FatalPSBTIssue guard for POR foreign inputs

Risk score

Why this scored 64/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 18/30
Exploitability 14/25
Stealth signal 12/15
Affected reach 8/15
Confidence 8/10
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.