AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Informational 20 Bitcoin

common: remove take() leak if new_initial_channel() fails.

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Rusty Russell

83/100 · Strong
common: remove take() leak if new_initial_channel() fails.

This happens in the fuzzer corpora, but that doesn't check for take()
leaks. Our unit tests do:

```
fuzz-initial_channel: outstanding taken(): 0x626c3b3affc8
make: *** [Makefile:823: unittest/tests/fuzz/fuzz-initial_channel] Error 1
```

This doesn't matter in real life, since we exit the subdaemon if this
fails, but it's still a bug.

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 fixes a small memory leak in a helper function used when setting up a new Lightning channel. The leak only occurs if the function fails partway through, and the project already exits the affected sub-program when that happens, so it is not considered a real-world security issue. The fix moves a few memory allocations to the very beginning of the function so they can be cleaned up correctly if an error occurs later.

Recommended action

No urgent action needed. Treat as routine code-quality / defensive fix. If running fuzzers or unit tests, ensure the updated test passes. No security advisory or patch deployment is required on its own.

Security signals we found

01

Memory leak / resource leak in error path

02

Detected by unit-test take() leak checker

03

Error path in channel initialization helper

Risk score

Why this scored 20/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 2/30
Exploitability 1/25
Stealth signal 2/15
Affected reach 2/15
Confidence 9/10
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.