AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Low 35 Bitcoin

lazy trampoline:

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by ThomasV

53/100 · Thin
lazy trampoline:

If a trampoline forwarder fails to find a path, it may return a list
of trampolines it knows how to reach, so that clients can add these
trampolines to their route.

The list of trampolines and fees is written in the error data of
the 'update_fail_htlc' message.
✓ Subject identifies a change✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Explains rationale or failure mode! Too few words to establish purpose
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit changes how Electrum routes Lightning trampoline payments. When a trampoline forwarder cannot find a path, it can now return a list of alternative trampolines it knows, along with their fees, inside the payment failure message. The sender then uses that list to build a better route. The change also removes the old fixed two-trampoline-hop option and adjusts when fee/expiry errors are raised during forwarding. It is a protocol/routing improvement, not a clearly disclosed security fix.

Recommended action

Review as a normal feature/refactor commit. Specifically audit decode_next_trampolines for malformed-data handling and ensure untrusted fee/cltv values from failure messages are bounded before use in route/fee calculations. Verify that the reordering in _maybe_forward_trampoline does not allow fee-budget bypass for non-direct-channel cases.

Security signals we found

01

New network protocol field parsing (decode_next_trampolines) with length and ECC point validation

02

Failure-message data now influences route selection and fee budget allocation

03

Logic reordering in trampoline forwarding: direct-channel availability now gates minimum fee/cltv failure responses

04

Removal of hardcoded two-trampoline policy in favor of dynamically suggested peers

Risk score

Why this scored 35/100

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