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

Correct DNSSEC proof validity time gap applied to header time

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Matt Corallo

95/100 · Strong
Correct DNSSEC proof validity time gap applied to header time

We intended to apply DNSSEC proof validity tests to constrain them
to within two hours of the latest block header time, but the code
landed with a two minute gap instead.

Given DNSSEC proof validity is usually many hours and grace periods
are used to ensure records close to expiry aren't used, this is
somewhat unlikely to have bitten anyone.
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Explains rationale or failure mode✓ Mentions testing or verification
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit fixes a typo-like bug in how DNSSEC proofs are checked against the latest known block time. The code was meant to allow a two-hour time window but accidentally used a two-minute window. This could cause valid DNSSEC proofs to be rejected too aggressively, especially on systems without the standard library or during fuzz testing. The commit message says this is unlikely to have affected real users because DNSSEC proofs are normally valid for many hours and safety margins are already applied.

Recommended action

Apply the patch to correct the time gap. Users on production std builds are not affected. Developers using no-std or fuzzing builds should update to avoid spurious rejection of valid DNSSEC proofs in onion-message DNS resolution.

Security signals we found

01

Time-window validation bug in DNSSEC proof verification

02

Intended two-hour tolerance implemented as two-minute tolerance

03

Affects only non-std or fuzzing build configurations

04

Could cause denial of valid onion-message DNS resolution paths

05

No cryptographic weakness or proof forgery introduced

Risk score

Why this scored 38/100

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