AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Moderate 59 Bitcoin

Properly consider blinded paths in `InFlightHtlcs`

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Matt Corallo

81/100 · Strong
Properly consider blinded paths in `InFlightHtlcs`

When paying a BOLT 12 invoice an amount greater than any one of
multiple blinded paths, we need to track how much is in-flight
across the paths when retrying. Here we do so, tracking blinded
path usage in a new field in `InFlightHtlcs`.

Fixes #2737
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Links an issue, advisory, or supporting reference
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit fixes a bug in how the Lightning Dev Kit tracks money that is already traveling along hidden ("blinded") payment paths. Previously, when retrying a payment split across several blinded paths, the software could over-send because it did not count how much was already in-flight on each blinded path. The patch adds tracking for those blinded paths and uses it when scoring routes, preventing attempts to exceed each path's stated maximum.

Recommended action

Review and merge. The patch is a targeted bugfix with regression tests. Downstream users relying on BOLT 12/blinded path payments should update to avoid potential payment failures or over-commitment on blinded routes.

Security signals we found

01

Fixes a routing/accounting bug that could allow exceeding a blinded path's htlc_maximum_msat across retries

02

Adds new blinded_hops liquidity tracking field to InFlightHtlcs

03

Updates scorer to include previously-untracked blinded-path in-flight liquidity in penalty calculations

04

Adds explicit htlc_maximum_msat enforcement in ProbabilisticScorer for blinded candidates

05

Includes regression tests for one-hop and multi-hop blinded path in-flight processing

Risk score

Why this scored 59/100

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