From martin.habovstiak at gmail.com Sat Jul 15 20:30:06 2023 From: martin.habovstiak at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Martin_Habov=C5=A1tiak?=) Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2023 22:30:06 +0200 Subject: [Lightning-dev] Potential vulnerability in Lightning backends: BOLT-11 "payment hash" does not commit to payment! In-Reply-To: References: <1utFohrCmGSLedGY8Pa6YSKkdKCPYDyESnIARlBdGBaRopJdElTn4NH004prS53mjhqbWYthLhVwoBZGf76bIrUlvVwKLKemPfJuJb6YqYw=@protonmail.com> <6cf3228cd9f8055f4aab54e47ed347b1@dtrt.org> Message-ID: Hi folks, I would also like to point out this can help testing a lot. I do integration testing of payment flow by spawning a secondary node, setting up a channel etc which takes considerable time even automated on regtest. Also it sometimes fails for silly unrelated reasons. D?a so 15. 7. 2023, 20:22 fiatjaf nap?sal(a): > On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 3:47?AM David A. Harding wrote: > > My question is whether you think it would be worthwhile to ask > > developers of the underlying LN node implementations you use to support > > self-payment of their own invoices (if they don't already). > > As far as I know no Lightning node has this ability, which is very > unfortunate. > If possible this should definitely be implemented. It would be the > biggest feature for custodial Lightning service providers of all kinds > since always. > _______________________________________________ > Lightning-dev mailing list > Lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: