AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Low 37 Bitcoin

gossipd: don't forget closed channels until 72 blocks, not 12.

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Rusty Russell

83/100 · Strong
gossipd: don't forget closed channels until 72 blocks, not 12.

Touches a pile of tests, but they're easy to find.

Changelog-Changed: Protocol: We now wait 72 blocks, not 12, before closing channels (BOLT update)
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>

Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Mentions testing or verification
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit changes how long Core Lightning nodes remember closed Lightning channels in their network map. The delay is increased from 12 blocks to 72 blocks after the funding output is spent, matching an update to the BOLT protocol specification. This is a protocol-compliance and robustness change, not a fix for an active security vulnerability. The main effect is that nodes keep stale channel information longer, which can slightly delay routing around dead channels but also gives more protection against blockchain reorganizations.

Recommended action

Treat as a routine protocol-compliance update. Review the associated BOLT RFC change (commit 4fe3f0b6056638b46dd3e5317947ebc2491758e8) to confirm the 72-block rationale, run the updated test suite, and deploy as part of normal maintenance. No urgent security response is indicated by the commit itself.

Security signals we found

01

Protocol constant change (12 -> 72 block delay) driven by BOLT specification update

02

No input validation, authorization, cryptographic, or memory-safety changes

03

Test-only modifications adjust block generation counts and expiry expectations

04

Changelog labels this as a protocol change, not a security fix

Risk score

Why this scored 37/100

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