AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Moderate 57 Bitcoin

refactor: remove unused QR code protocols

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by soralit

57/100 · Thin
refactor: remove unused QR code protocols
✓ Descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Uses a recognizable type or scope! No meaningful explanatory body
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit removes old, custom QR-code transaction formats for Bitcoin-family coins, Ethereum, and XRP, and replaces them with standardized formats. It also adds explicit rejections when the device receives a transaction through the generic 'ur:bytes' QR type for Bitcoin and Ethereum. The change is described by the vendor as a cleanup of unused protocols, but it also closes a path where a specially crafted QR code could potentially be misinterpreted as a valid transaction.

Recommended action

Treat this as a security-hardening refactor. Verify that all call sites of the removed *_bytes functions have been updated and that no fallback code path still accepts ur:bytes for BTC/ETH/XRP. Review whether other chains still allowed through ur:bytes (e.g., Tron) perform sufficient validation, since the generic inference path remains open for non-BTC/non-ETH view types.

Security signals we found

01

Removal of custom protobuf-based QR transaction paths reduces attack surface

02

Explicit rejection of ur:bytes for Bitcoin-family and Ethereum transactions

03

Legacy handlers used unwrap() and raw protobuf deserialization on untrusted QR input

04

XRP legacy signing derived a child xpub and built a JSON transaction from protobuf fields with multiple unwrap() calls

05

Ethereum legacy signing decoded a protobuf payload, extracted a legacy transaction, signed it, and returned a protobuf result

Risk score

Why this scored 57/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 18/30
Exploitability 12/25
Stealth signal 8/15
Affected reach 10/15
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.