AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Informational 22 Bitcoin

plugin: trezor: handle passphrase_always_on_device

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by f321x

81/100 · Strong
plugin: trezor: handle passphrase_always_on_device

Trezor devices have a config option `passphrase_always_on_device`
that might be set
(e.g. through the CLI `trezorctl set passphrase on --force-on-device`).
This makes the device enforce passphrase input on the device (in
comparison to input through the Electrum GUI).

There were two issues when this config is enabled:
1. On V1 devices the passphrase would be prompted twice. Once
after entering the PIN (automatically by the device), then
Electrum would initiate a second, redundant passphrase prompt.
2. On THP devices (Safe 7), the setup would error as
`client.get_session()` must receive `PassphraseSettings.ON_DEVICE`
which it didn't.

Tested on Safe 3 and Safe 7.
Fixes https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/issues/10868
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Mentions testing or verification✓ Links an issue, advisory, or supporting reference
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit fixes a bug in how Electrum talks to Trezor hardware wallets when a device setting forces passphrase entry on the Trezor itself instead of in Electrum. Previously, older Trezor devices could ask for the passphrase twice, and newer Safe 7 devices would fail to set up. The fix checks the device's setting and tells the Trezor library to handle the passphrase on the device when appropriate. It is a usability/compatibility fix, not a vulnerability patch.

Recommended action

Treat as a normal bug-fix / compatibility commit. No urgent security action required. Reviewers may want to verify that PassphraseSetting.ON_DEVICE is only used when the device explicitly reports passphrase_always_on_device, to avoid changing behavior for users who type passphrases in Electrum.

Security signals we found

01

Hardware wallet integration change

02

Passphrase handling change

03

No cryptographic or authorization bypass visible in diff

04

No mention of CVE, security advisory, or researcher attribution

Risk score

Why this scored 22/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 5/30
Exploitability 0/25
Stealth signal 0/15
Affected reach 5/15
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.