AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Moderate 51 Bitcoin

Detect channel alternative funding transaction confirmation

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Wilmer Paulino

73/100 · Adequate
Detect channel alternative funding transaction confirmation

Whether it's a splice, or a dual-funded RBF, we need to know which
funding transaction out of all of the negotiated ones is currently
confirmed in case we need to broadcast the holder commitment.
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides detailed explanatory context
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit adds tracking in the Lightning node's channel monitor so that when a renegotiated funding transaction (from a channel splice or a dual-funded RBF) gets confirmed on-chain, the node knows which funding transaction is the real one. Without this, the node might broadcast the wrong commitment transaction during a force-close, potentially losing funds or getting into an inconsistent state. It is a defensive correctness fix, not an obvious remote exploit.

Recommended action

Review the interaction between `alternative_funding_confirmed`, `funding_spend_confirmed`, and `pending_funding` during reorgs to ensure no race condition can leave the monitor with an unpromoted or incorrectly promoted funding scope. Test force-close scenarios where a splice/RBF funding confirms just as the monitor stops accepting updates.

Security signals we found

01

Adds state tracking for alternative confirmed funding transactions to prevent broadcasting stale holder commitments

02

Introduces a new on-chain event type for irrevocable promotion of a renegotiated funding scope

03

Includes debug assertions that no conflicting funding-spend confirmation exists when an alternative funding confirms

04

Handles reorg/uncertainty by clearing `alternative_funding_confirmed` on block disconnect and transaction_unconfirmed

05

Serialization updated so the new field survives persistence

Risk score

Why this scored 51/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 18/30
Exploitability 8/25
Stealth signal 6/15
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.