Lightning Network DaemonApplication · Lightning Network Daemon Project

CVE-2020-26895

MEDIUM · 5.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2020-10-21
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
62/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
Prior to 0.10.0-beta, LND (Lightning Network Daemon) would have accepted a counterparty high-S signature and broadcast tx-relay invalid local commitment/HTLC transactions. This can be exploited by any peer with an open channel regardless of the victim situation (e.g., routing node, payment-receiver, or payment-sender). The impact is a loss of funds in certain situations.

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · high confidence

In LND versions prior to 0.10.0-beta, the node incorrectly validated counterparty signatures by accepting high-S values, which are invalid per BIP-62. This allowed any peer with an open channel to provide malicious signatures that would be accepted and broadcast as invalid commitment or HTLC transactions, potentially causing loss of funds for the victim.

MitigationUpgrade LND to version 0.10.0-beta or later, which implements proper high-S signature validation. Before upgrading, review all open channels for any anomalous activity.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.

NVD · CPE data
Lightning Network DaemonApplication
Affected:= 0.1= 0.1.1= 0.2= 0.2.1= 0.3= 0.4= 0.4.1= 0.4.2= 0.5= 0.5.1= 0.5.2= 0.6

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Check installed LND version
    Run `lncli version` or inspect the LND binary with `--version` to obtain the exact version string
    Affected if The version is 0.6 or any version from 0.1 through 0.6 (including 0.1, 0.1.1, 0.2, 0.2.1, 0.3, 0.4, 0.4.1, 0.4.2, 0.5, 0.5.1, 0.5.2, 0.6)
  2. Verify open channel count
    Run `lncli listchannels` to enumerate active channels
    Affected if There are one or more open channels with remote peers, as the vulnerability is exploitable by any counterparty with an active channel
  3. Review recent commitment transactions
    Run `lncli listpaginated --type=all` or query the channel database for recent commitment transactions to identify any that may have been broadcast with invalid high-S signatures
    Affected if Any commitment or HTLC transactions were accepted from peers that were subsequently rejected by the network or flagged as invalid by other nodes
  4. Inspect pending HTLCs
    Run `lncli listpendingchannels` to examine any pending HTLCs that may have been submitted with malformed signatures
    Affected if There are pending HTLCs that were not resolved or were stuck due to signature validation issues
  5. Check peer node behavior
    Review node logs and run `lncli getnodeinfo` on connected peers to identify any that are propagating invalid signatures or have been flagged by the network
    Affected if Connected peers have been identified as broadcasting invalid commitment transactions or have been isolated by other nodes for signature violations

If the installed LND version is 0.6 or earlier and there are open channels with peers, the environment is potentially affected by this vulnerability.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade LND to version 0.10.0-beta or later, which implements proper high-S signature validation. Before upgrading, review all open channels for any anomalous activity.

Fix this in Lightning Network Daemon Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation1.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
6.0 hours of engineering $1,060
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,696.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-26895 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2020-26895 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data