← Watch feed
fuzz: track pending and resolved payments
Public commit record
78/100 · Adequate
What the developer wrote
Authored by Joost Jager
fuzz: track pending and resolved payments
Track payment lifecycle by maintaining pending_payments and
resolved_payments arrays per node:
- When sending a payment, add its PaymentId to pending_payments
- On PaymentSent/PaymentFailed events, move the PaymentId from
pending to resolved (or assert it was already resolved for
duplicate events)
This tracking enables verifying payment state consistency after
node restarts.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-Authored-By: Matt Corallo <git@bluematt.me>
✓ Descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Mentions testing or verification
What changed, and why it matters
This commit only adds bookkeeping inside a fuzzing test harness. It tracks which payments are in-flight versus finished so the test can later check consistency after simulated node restarts. There is no change to production code, no user-facing behavior change, and no security fix.
Recommended action
No action needed; this is a benign test-only change.
Security signals we found
No strong security signals were identified.
Evidence from the diff
The diff modifies fuzz/src/chanmon_consistency.rs, a channel-monitor consistency fuzz target. It introduces two RefCell-wrapped arrays, pending_payments and resolved_payments, one per simulated node. When the fuzzer sends a payment successfully, the PaymentId is pushed into pending_payments for the source node. When PaymentSent or PaymentFailed events are processed, the PaymentId is moved to resolved_payments, with assertions for duplicate events. This is purely test instrumentation to enable future post-restart state checks.
Changed components
fuzz/src/chanmon_consistency.rsInspect captured patch +47 / −4
diff --git a/fuzz/src/chanmon_consistency.rs b/fuzz/src/chanmon_consistency.rs
index 1bcb669..b5f70a3 100644
--- a/fuzz/src/chanmon_consistency.rs
+++ b/fuzz/src/chanmon_consistency.rs
@@ -1109,6 +1109,9 @@ pub fn do_test<Out: Output>(data: &[u8], underlying_out: Out, anchors: bool) {
let mut node_b_ser = nodes[1].encode();
let mut node_c_ser = nodes[2].encode();
+ let pending_payments = RefCell::new([Vec::new(), Vec::new(), Vec::new()]);
+ let resolved_payments = RefCell::new([Vec::new(), Vec::new(), Vec::new()]);
+
macro_rules! test_return {
() => {{
assert_eq!(nodes[0].list_channels().len(), 1);
@@ -1508,6 +1511,8 @@ pub fn do_test<Out: Output>(data: &[u8], underlying_out: Out, anchors: bool) {
let mut claim_set = new_hash_map();
let mut events = nodes[$node].get_and_clear_pending_events();
let had_events = !events.is_empty();
+ let mut pending_payments = pending_payments.borrow_mut();
+ let mut resolved_payments = resolved_payments.borrow_mut();
for event in events.drain(..) {
match event {
events::Event::PaymentClaimable { payment_hash, .. } => {
@@ -1519,11 +1524,32 @@ pub fn do_test<Out: Output>(data: &[u8], underlying_out: Out, anchors: bool) {
}
}
},
- events::Event::PaymentSent { .. } => {},
+ events::Event::PaymentSent { payment_id, .. } => {
+ let sent_id = payment_id.unwrap();
+ let idx_opt =
+ pending_payments[$node].iter().position(|id| *id == sent_id);
+ if let Some(idx) = idx_opt {
+ pending_payments[$node].remove(idx);
+ resolved_payments[$node].push(sent_id);
+ } else {
+ assert!(resolved_payments[$node].contains(&sent_id));
+ }
+ },
+ events::Event::PaymentFailed { payment_id, .. } => {
+ let idx_opt =
+ pending_payments[$node].iter().position(|id| *id == payment_id);
+ if let Some(idx) = idx_opt {
+ pending_payments[$node].remove(idx);
+ resolved_payments[$node].push(payment_id);
+ } else if !resolved_payments[$node].contains(&payment_id) {
+ // Payment failed immediately on send, so it was never added to
+ // pending_payments. Add it to resolved_payments to track it.
+ resolved_payments[$node].push(payment_id);
+ }
+ },
events::Event::PaymentClaimed { .. } => {},
events::Event::PaymentPathSuccessful { .. } => {},
events::Event::PaymentPathFailed { .. } => {},
- events::Event::PaymentFailed { .. } => {},
events::Event::ProbeSuccessful { .. }
| events::Event::ProbeFailed { .. } => {
// Even though we don't explicitly send probes, because probes are
@@ -1619,7 +1645,11 @@ pub fn do_test<Out: Output>(data: &[u8], underlying_out: Out, anchors: bool) {
let (secret, hash) = get_payment_secret_hash(dest, payment_ctr);
let mut id = PaymentId([0; 32]);
id.0[0..8].copy_from_slice(&payment_ctr.to_ne_bytes());
- send_payment(source, dest, dest_chan_id, amt, secret, hash, id)
+ let succeeded = send_payment(source, dest, dest_chan_id, amt, secret, hash, id);
+ if succeeded {
+ pending_payments.borrow_mut()[source_idx].push(id);
+ }
+ succeeded
};
let send_noret = |source_idx, dest_idx, dest_chan_id, amt, payment_ctr: &mut u64| {
send(source_idx, dest_idx, dest_chan_id, amt, payment_ctr);
@@ -1638,7 +1668,20 @@ pub fn do_test<Out: Output>(data: &[u8], underlying_out: Out, anchors: bool) {
let (secret, hash) = get_payment_secret_hash(dest, payment_ctr);
let mut id = PaymentId([0; 32]);
id.0[0..8].copy_from_slice(&payment_ctr.to_ne_bytes());
- send_hop_payment(source, middle, middle_scid, dest, dest_scid, amt, secret, hash, id);
+ let succeeded = send_hop_payment(
+ source,
+ middle,
+ middle_scid,
+ dest,
+ dest_scid,
+ amt,
+ secret,
+ hash,
+ id,
+ );
+ if succeeded {
+ pending_payments.borrow_mut()[source_idx].push(id);
+ }
};
let v = get_slice!(1)[0];
Risk score
Our methodology →Why this scored 15/100
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.