Skip to content

Conversation

@morehouse
Copy link
Owner

No description provided.

@morehouse morehouse force-pushed the lnd_excessive_failback_exploit branch from 41145ab to e4f3c1f Compare March 4, 2025 14:34
@morehouse
Copy link
Owner Author

@Arvin21M: Ready for review!

Copy link

@Arvin21M Arvin21M left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A few minor/optional edit suggestions.
All the links work and appear to be pointing to the right destination.
This is great! 🙏
:shipit:

As part of this handling, nodes need to detect when any currently outstanding HTLCs are missing from the confirmed commitment transaction so that those HTLCs can be failed backward on the upstream channel.

# The Excessive Failback Bug

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
The function `failBackMissingHtlcs` detects missing HTLCs in a confirmed commitment and initiates their failback. It compares the confirmed commitment’s HTLCs against any other valid counterparty commitment. If an HTLC is missing, LND assumes it was dropped and fails it upstream.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is more of a "nice to have" as an opening for the section, not critical.

Copy link
Owner Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm having trouble figuring out how to incorporate this in a way that flows smoothly. There's already an explanation of the function after the code block, so I think I'll just leave it as is.

@morehouse morehouse force-pushed the lnd_excessive_failback_exploit branch from e4f3c1f to 056b121 Compare March 4, 2025 15:50
@morehouse morehouse merged commit 6501082 into main Mar 4, 2025
@morehouse morehouse deleted the lnd_excessive_failback_exploit branch March 4, 2025 15:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants