AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Low 38 Bitcoin

Special handling for get_extended_pubkey_at_path() distinguishing error codes

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Ilya Artemov

50/100 · Thin
Special handling for get_extended_pubkey_at_path() distinguishing error codes
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component! No meaningful explanatory body
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit changes how the Ledger Bitcoin app reports failures when deriving public keys from a BIP32 path. Previously, almost any derivation failure was reported as a generic 'bad state' error. Now, the app distinguishes between different underlying error codes, specifically mapping two SDK error codes (0x4212 and 0x4215) to a 'not supported' status word instead of 'bad state'. This is a defensive hardening change: it gives callers more accurate error information and avoids misleading 'bad state' responses for permission or policy-related derivation failures. There is no direct evidence in the commit of an exploitable vulnerability being fixed.

Recommended action

Treat as a defensive hardening commit. Review whether any client software or tests depend on the previous SW_BAD_STATE response for derivation failures and update them to expect SW_NOT_SUPPORTED where appropriate. No urgent security patch is indicated by the diff alone.

Security signals we found

01

Error-code propagation improvement for BIP32 key derivation failures

02

Mapping of SDK error 0x4212 (root derivation without master permission) to SW_NOT_SUPPORTED

03

Mapping of SDK error 0x4215 (unauthorized derivation path) to SW_NOT_SUPPORTED

04

Replacement of generic SW_BAD_STATE with more specific status words for derivation errors

05

Defensive hardening in public-key derivation used across wallet registration, PSBT signing, and swap address checks

Risk score

Why this scored 38/100

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