AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Low 44 Bitcoin

fix(core): don't drop layout objects after `draw_simple()`

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Roman Zeyde

85/100 · Strong
fix(core): don't drop layout objects after `draw_simple()`

After `draw_simple()` is called, `layout` is still referenced by
`trezor.ui.CURRENT_LAYOUT` and its event-handling tasks are still
running.

Therefore, it MUST NOT be dropped, until a new layout is started.

[no changelog]
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Uses a recognizable type or scope✓ Provides detailed explanatory context
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit fixes a bug in the Trezor hardware wallet's user-interface code. Previously, certain simple on-screen messages were wrapped in a Python `with` block, which caused the underlying layout object to be cleaned up (dropped) as soon as the message was drawn. However, the system still held a reference to that layout and its background event-handling tasks were still running. Dropping it early could lead to a crash, a frozen screen, or undefined behavior while the device is showing important prompts such as asking the user to enter their passphrase on a host computer or displaying a 'please wait' message. The fix removes the `with` wrapper so the layout object stays alive until a new screen replaces it.

Recommended action

Treat as a stability/reliability fix. Review whether the premature drop was reachable in released firmware and whether it could be triggered by user interaction during passphrase or wait-text flows. If a release is pending, include this fix. No immediate user action is required.

Security signals we found

01

Use-after-free / premature object drop of UI layout with active event-handling tasks

02

Potential crash or UI freeze during security-sensitive prompts (passphrase entry, wait screens)

03

Incorrect lifetime management across Rust/MicroPython boundary

04

No changelog entry suggests low-profile internal fix

Risk score

Why this scored 44/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 12/30
Exploitability 8/25
Stealth signal 7/15
Affected reach 8/15
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.