Revert "update makefile to remove hsm_encryption"
What the developer wrote
Authored by Rusty Russell
Revert "update makefile to remove hsm_encryption"
This reverts commit 084b03375cac181c7ddeba7204a11e2877645003.
What changed, and why it matters
This commit is a simple build-system revert that puts one file (common/hsm_encryption.o) back into the fuzzing test Makefile. It undoes a prior change that had removed that file from the fuzzer's build list. There is no direct code change shown, and nothing in the commit message or diff indicates a security vulnerability or fix. It is most likely a routine build correction.
No immediate security action is warranted. Treat as a normal build/maintenance revert. If investigating a broader issue, review the original commit 084b03375cac181c7ddeba7204a11e2877645003 and any related CI failures or fuzzer coverage regressions.
Security signals we found
File name contains 'hsm_encryption', which relates to HSM/encryption functionality, but the change itself is only a Makefile object inclusion for fuzzing builds.
No security-relevant description, advisory, CVE, or researcher attribution in commit message or diff.
Evidence from the diff
The diff adds common/hsm_encryption.o to FUZZ_COMMON_OBJS in tests/fuzz/Makefile, reversing a previous Makefile edit. No source code is modified. The commit message only says it reverts commit 084b03375cac181c7ddeba7204a11e2877645003 and gives no security context. No references are supplied. The change affects only the fuzzing build target.
Changed components
tests/fuzz/MakefileInspect captured patch +1 / −0
diff --git a/tests/fuzz/Makefile b/tests/fuzz/Makefile
index bcd6f0fd..d7cdd0c9 100644
--- a/tests/fuzz/Makefile
+++ b/tests/fuzz/Makefile
@@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ FUZZ_COMMON_OBJS := \
common/features.o \
common/fee_states.o \
common/hash_u5.o \
+ common/hsm_encryption.o \
common/htlc_state.o \
common/initial_channel.o \
common/initial_commit_tx.o \
Why this scored 11/100
Community notes
Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.
The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.