Files

T

davideandClaude Opus 5 c4b2dc3ea2 Advertise the jackpot that will actually be paid (B-65)

participant_count and jackpot_sats were computed over every round_participants
row, while the draw only picks from confirmed participants and the payout only
spends their sats. So the advertised jackpot could exceed the one paid out, and a
player whose bet was later abandoned appeared in the count and then vanished
again.

Counting only confirmed rows would have fixed the arithmetic and broken something
else: the player who just bet would see neither themselves nor their money for a
whole block. So this is the same confirmed/in-flight split the balance already
exposes (balance_sats vs pending_balance_sats): participant_count and
jackpot_sats are now the confirmed, authoritative figures, and
pending_participant_count/pending_jackpot_sats/has_pending_bets report what is in
flight — inclusive figures, not deltas, matching the balance pair's convention.

/'s round card shows the confirmed numbers big and the difference as an amber
"+N in attesa" suffix, reusing .balance-pending's colour for the same "not
settled yet" meaning. The two new spans render from server data through t(), so
they carry no data-i18n and onLanguageChange() repaints them from the last
response — the one-mechanism-per-element rule. Both strings are in all 7
languages.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

2026-08-04 11:52:10 +02:00

6.4 KiB

Raw Blame History

BUGS.md — audit of 2026-08-03

Third full-codebase audit, opened after the 2026-07-26 (B-01 … B-24) and 2026-07-27 (B-25 … B-49) lists were emptied. Numbering continues from the last fixed finding, B-51.

The list opened at B-52 … B-72 and holds only what is still open: a finding is removed from this file once it is fixed, and is not listed here afterwards. Per CLAUDE.md's convention each entry gets its own commit with its own regression test, and the B-nn marker goes in a comment next to the fix, so git log --all --grep 'B-nn' is the record of how any closed finding was closed.

State of the tree at audit time: 264 unit tests, all passing; tests/integration/ still empty; withdrawal and the RBF bump path still never live-broadcast.

Verified as not broken while looking for these: i18n key parity (146 identical keys across all 7 languages), HTML escaping of every user-controlled value in admin.js, the Alembic chain (linear, single head, matching models.py), strictly-integer satoshi arithmetic everywhere, and .gitignore coverage of secrets/DB/logs (nothing sensitive is tracked in git).

Severity is about consequence, not likelihood: critical = money stuck or lost, or the lottery stops; high = a security control that does not hold; medium = wrong behaviour with a bounded blast radius; low = drift between documentation and code.

Critical

(not new) `drawing` does not resume after a restart

Already tracked as an accepted gap in CLAUDE.md's "Known gaps", not re-numbered here. Worth restating in context: with restart: unless-stopped on the app container, this is the one state that gets stuck with money in play, and it remains the last prerequisite for running unattended.

Medium — correctness and robustness

B-66 — nothing stops rounds from opening with no `fee_address` configured

app/rounds/config.py:12-17, app/rounds/scheduler.py:330-335.

A fresh instance starts with fee_address = "". Rounds open, bets are accepted and confirm, and only then does the payout refuse to build — leaving the round in paying_out, retrying every 60 s, with the audit log as the only signal.

Fix: refuse to open a round while fee_address is unset (and surface it on /admin and as a maintenance-style banner), so the failure happens before anyone's money is committed.

B-67 — `/qr/{address}` is unauthenticated, synchronous and only shape-validated

app/api/routes/qr.py:11-21.

qrcode.make runs on the event loop, so the endpoint is a cheap CPU amplifier for an unauthenticated caller, and the regex accepts any plm1[a-z0-9]{10,90} string without validating the bech32 checksum — so it happily renders a QR for a non-address.

Fix: validate with is_valid_plm_address (already used by withdrawals and by the admin fee_address validator), and either offload the render or cache it per address.

Low — documentation and consistency drift

B-68 — CLAUDE.md and README describe a state the code has moved past

CLAUDE.md's tech-stack line still says JWT has no revocation (B-34); token_version implements exactly that revocation (app/db/models.py:29, app/auth/dependencies.py:26).
"Known gaps" still says no rate limiting anywhere (B-33); login and registration are throttled (app/auth/rate_limit.py). What is genuinely still unthrottled is bets, withdrawals and the admin endpoints — that is the claim worth keeping.
"Known gaps" still says /report-bug is a placeholder; it is fully implemented and translated, with admin triage. Only /guida is still a stub.
Test counts are stale in three places: 264 actual, CLAUDE.md says 253 twice, README says 232.
The code map omits app/auth/rate_limit.py, app/api/client_ip.py and app/api/routes/bug_reports.py.
README links flowchart.mmd, which does not exist (the diagrams live in flowchart/), describes docs/running-the-server.md as covering "local venv vs. Docker" (that workflow was removed in B-44), and links the anchor CLAUDE.md#tech-stack-mvp, which no longer exists.

B-69 — stale in-code comments

app/tx/reconcile.py:206 calls the payout retry "a future payout-retry routine — still an open gap"; it exists (B-26).
app/db/base.py:9 says "five concurrent background tasks"; there are six.
app/auth/routes.py:31 cites B-31 where it means B-33 (see B-58).

B-70 — the flowchart's WITHDRAW precondition is not implemented as written

flowchart/platform-overview.mmd:39 (node E1) states a withdrawal cannot happen together with a bet in progress. The code only serializes the builds through the per-user lock (app/tx/locks.py): a withdrawal is accepted while a bet is still unconfirmed, as long as confirmed UTXOs cover it.

CLAUDE.md declares every node and edge label of the diagrams a behaviour that must be implemented as described, so one of the two has to move — most likely the diagram, since the lock already prevents the actual double-spend hazard, but that is a decision, not a cleanup.

B-71 — `.env` points `MASTER_KEY_PATH` at a second copy of the master key

CLAUDE.md's deployment section prescribes pointing MASTER_KEY_PATH at the host-side ./data/keys/master.xprv.enc so the venv scripts and the container read one file. .env instead sets ./master.xprv.enc, and both files now exist in the working tree (both gitignored). They were verified during this audit to decrypt to the same xprv, so nothing has diverged yet — but scripts/decrypt_master_key.py reads a different file from the one the container uses, and a future generate_master_key.py --overwrite would split them silently, with an ops recovery path that then reports the wrong key.

The same duplication exists for the database (./plm_lottery.db next to data/db/plm_lottery.db), which is less dangerous but equally confusing.

Fix: set MASTER_KEY_PATH=./data/keys/master.xprv.enc in .env, delete the stray root copy once confirmed redundant, and state the same for DATABASE_URL.

B-72 — `docs/setup.md` still frames setup as "locally or via Docker"

docs/setup.md:1-10 lists Python as a prerequisite "for the local/venv workflow" and describes the master-key step as local or Docker, while B-44 made Docker the only supported way to run the server (docs/running-the-server.md and README were updated, this file was not). The venv genuinely is needed for tests, migrations and the key scripts — the wording just needs to say that instead of implying a second way to run the server.

6.4 KiB Raw Blame History