AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Low 41 Bitcoin

lnpeer: add fixme for unsafe zeroconf behaviour

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by SomberNight

76/100 · Adequate
lnpeer: add fixme for unsafe zeroconf behaviour

there is a later check in Channel.update_funded_state
added in https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/pull/9624
but it only validates the funding_tx once it's already 3 blocks deep
✓ Descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Links an issue, advisory, or supporting reference
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

A developer left a FIXME note in Electrum's Lightning code warning that a feature called 'zeroconf' channels marks a payment channel as funded before actually checking that the funding transaction exists or contains the required multisig output. The commit does not fix the issue; it only documents the concern. The note explicitly says this is unsafe and must be reworked before mainnet use, suggesting the current code could let a malicious or buggy peer make Electrum believe money was locked in a channel when it really wasn't.

Recommended action

Treat this as a known security TODO, not a completed fix. Before enabling zeroconf channels on mainnet, add validation that the funding transaction is in the mempool and that it contains the correct multisig funding output before transitioning the channel to FUNDED and sending channel_ready. Consider gating zeroconf support behind explicit user opt-in or disabling it until the rework is complete.

Security signals we found

01

FIXME comment explicitly labels behavior as unsafe and requiring rework before mainnet usage

02

Missing validation of funding transaction before marking channel as funded

03

Missing validation that funding transaction contains the expected multisig funding output

04

State transition to FUNDED occurs before mempool confirmation for zeroconf channels

05

Later validation only triggers at 3 confirmations, leaving a trust window

Risk score

Why this scored 41/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 12/30
Exploitability 8/25
Stealth signal 7/15
Affected reach 5/15
Confidence 6/10
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.