AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Low 40 Bitcoin

bolt11: followup #10940

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by f321x

36/100 · Opaque
bolt11: followup #10940

Address review comments of #10940
✓ Subject identifies a change✓ Links an issue, advisory, or supporting reference! No meaningful explanatory body
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit tightens how Electrum parses BOLT11 Lightning invoices. It now rejects duplicate 'n' (node pubkey) tags instead of silently keeping only the first one, and it rejects invoice timestamps that are negative or too far in the future. These are defensive correctness fixes that reduce the chance a malformed or malicious invoice could confuse the wallet, but they are follow-up cleanups rather than a fix for a known active attack.

Recommended action

Review and merge as a hardening improvement. Users and downstream integrators should ensure they are on a version that includes this follow-up if they process untrusted BOLT11 invoices.

Security signals we found

01

Stricter validation of invoice timestamp bounds

02

Duplicate 'n' tag now raises an exception instead of being silently dropped

03

Follow-up to prior PR #10940, indicating a recent area of security-sensitive review

04

Test changes confirm parser now rejects duplicate tags including 'n'

Risk score

Why this scored 40/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 8/30
Exploitability 7/25
Stealth signal 6/15
Affected reach 8/15
Confidence 7/10
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.