AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Low 25 Bitcoin

channeld: Add new feerate type ‘splice’

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Dusty Daemon

60/100 · Adequate
channeld: Add new feerate type ‘splice’

This new feerate gives us more careful control of what feerate splices should be at.
✓ Descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides an explanatory body
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit changes how Core Lightning sets transaction fees for 'splice' operations, which are a way to resize a Lightning channel while it is still open. Previously, splicing used the same fee rate as opening a new channel. The patch introduces a separate 'splice' fee rate and, for the party that opened the channel, adds a small configurable buffer to reduce disagreements with the peer. The change is a refinement of fee policy rather than a clear-cut security fix; it could reduce the chance of a splice transaction getting stuck or rejected, but it does not by itself fix a known exploitable bug.

Recommended action

Treat as a normal feature/refinement commit. If this patch is being backported, verify whether it is part of a larger fix for a disclosed splice-fee issue and look for an accompanying advisory or CVE. No immediate hardening is required based on the diff alone.

Security signals we found

01

New fee-rate parameter introduced for splice operations

02

Channel opener now gets a configurable feerate offset for splice transactions

03

Log lines expanded to include opening and splice feerates

04

Test fakenet updated to parse new wire field

Risk score

Why this scored 25/100

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