LNbits improperly handles potential network and payment failures when using Eclair backend

Exploitation

No confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next marks exploitation only from CISA KEV.

CVSS

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

EPSS

• CVE-2024-34694: 0.60% estimated exploitation activity in the next 30 days; percentile 48.84 (FIRST EPSS, 2026-11-03). This is a model estimate, not proof of exploitation or customer exposure.

As published by the source; long descriptions are shortened.

Summary Paying invoices in Eclair that do not get settled within the internal timeout (about 30s) lead to a payment being considered failed, even though it may still be in flight. Details Using blocking: true on the API call will lead to a timeout error if a payment does not get settled in the 30s timeout with the error: Ask timed out on [Actor[akka://eclair-node/user/$l#134241942]] after [30000 ms]. Message of type [fr.acinq.eclair.payment.send.PaymentInitiator$SendPaymentToNode]. A typical reason for AskTimeoutException is that the recipient actor didn't send a reply. https://github.com/lnbits/lnbits/blob/c04c13b2f8cfbb625571a07dfddeb65ea6df8dac/lnbits/wallets/eclair.py#L138 This is considered a payment failure by parts of the code, and assumes the payment is not going to be settled after: https://github.com/lnbits/lnbits/blob/c04c13b2f8cfbb625571a07dfddeb65ea6df8dac/lnbits/wallets/eclair.py#L144…

Published by the source

17 Jun 2024, 21:24 UTC

Last modified by the source

7 Jul 2026, 17:56 UTC

Source last checked

26 Oct 2026, 13:16 UTC

1. Revision 2 · amended · 26 Oct 2026

   Amended from ghsa record GHSA-3j4h-h3fp-vwww

2. Revision 1 · created · 24 Oct 2026

   Published from osv record GHSA-3j4h-h3fp-vwww

Preview the exact text before you copy it. Commands are read-only suggestions; review them before running anything.

# Patch Next advisory brief: CVE-2024-34694

Advisory: LNbits improperly handles potential network and payment failures when using Eclair backend
IDs: CVE-2024-34694, GHSA-3j4h-h3fp-vwww
Record: https://patchnext.com/advisories/cve-2024-34694 (revision 2, source checked 26 Oct 2026, 13:16 UTC)
Inventory: none attached. This brief comes from a public page and does not say whether any deployment is affected.
Severity: High (CVSS 8.1)
Exploitation: no confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next confirms exploitation only from CISA KEV.
Vendor response: Vendor fix available; fixed versions by package: lnbits 0.12.6. A vendor fix does not mean a deployment is fixed.

## Affected components
- PyPI lnbits: affected < 0.12.6; fixed in 0.12.6

## Suggested inspection (read-only)
- `python -m pip show lnbits`: prints the installed version. Run with the environment that serves production active.

## Supported action
Upgrade each affected component to a fixed version on its release line. For a transitive dependency, upgrade the parent package or add an override or constraint, then regenerate the lockfile. Redeploy every environment that ran an affected version.

## Required regression checks
- Run the test suite and a production build.
- Exercise the features that depend on lnbits.
- Repeat the inspection and confirm that only fixed versions remain installed.

## Rollback considerations
- Keep the previous lockfile and deployment artifact. Rolling back reinstates the vulnerable version, so apply any documented mitigation while you fix forward.

## Unresolved questions
- Which deployments run an affected version?
- Exploitation status can change. Check again before lowering the priority.
- Mark the work resolved only after the fixed version is verified in production.

## Sources
- Verified: https://osv.dev/vulnerability/GHSA-3j4h-h3fp-vwww (OSV record GHSA-3j4h-h3fp-vwww lists affected ranges: PyPI lnbits >=0 <0.12.6 (fixed))
- Verified: https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-3j4h-h3fp-vwww (GitHub-reviewed advisory GHSA-3j4h-h3fp-vwww lists affected ranges: PyPI lnbits >=0 <0.12.6)

Commands are suggestions: review each one before running it.