774d11c58f
c4068cf37btest: add negative zero CSV failure script test vector (azuchi)37edf0e233test: add CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY failure-path script test vectors (azuchi)a86a96d17btest: add CHECKSIGVERIFY/CHECKMULTISIGVERIFY failure script test vectors (azuchi) Pull request description: While reviewing spec coverage of `src/test/data/script_tests.json` against the script interpreter, I found two gaps that are testable within this file's harness but were never covered: **1. `OP_CHECKSIGVERIFY` / `OP_CHECKMULTISIGVERIFY` failure paths** `OP_CHECKSIGVERIFY` never appears anywhere in the file, and no vector expects the `CHECKSIGVERIFY` or `CHECKMULTISIGVERIFY` script errors, so the VERIFY tail of both opcodes (interpreter.cpp, `case OP_CHECKSIGVERIFY`) is untested here. This commit adds static vectors that fail the signature check with an empty signature and a valid pubkey, so each opcode returns its opcode-specific error code. The success paths require real signatures and remain covered by the auto-generated tests and functional tests. **2. `CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY` (BIP65) failure paths** `SCRIPT_VERIFY_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY` is never set by any vector: `CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY` only appears as an unflagged NOP, so none of the BIP65 semantics are exercised, while the equivalent CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY section has existed since #7994. This commit adds a section mirroring the CSV tests, covering every failure path reachable in this harness: - empty stack → `INVALID_STACK_OPERATION` - negative operand → `NEGATIVE_LOCKTIME` - negative zero (`0x80`), evaluated as 0 by `CScriptNum` → `UNSATISFIED_LOCKTIME` rather than `NEGATIVE_LOCKTIME` - non-minimal encoding under MINIMALDATA → `SCRIPTNUM` - final input nSequence (lock time requirement itself satisfied) → `UNSATISFIED_LOCKTIME` - operand greater than the tx nLockTime → `UNSATISFIED_LOCKTIME` - height/time type mismatch → `UNSATISFIED_LOCKTIME` - 5-byte operand (2^32) accepted by the parser, then failing the type check → `UNSATISFIED_LOCKTIME` Unlike CSV (where an operand with bit 31 set makes the opcode pass without calling `CheckSequence`), the CLTV success path cannot be expressed in this file, because the test harness spends with nLockTime=0 and a final nSequence; it is covered by `tx_valid.json` and functional tests instead. A comment in the JSON notes this. **3. Negative zero vector for the existing `CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY` section** Following review feedback, the third commit adds the same negative-zero vector to the existing CSV section: the footgun is identical there (a re-implementation treating any operand with the sign bit set as negative would return `NEGATIVE_LOCKTIME` instead of reaching `CheckSequence`), and it keeps the two sections mirrored. ACKs for top commit: achow101: ACKc4068cf37bsedited: ACKc4068cf37bTree-SHA512: e7baa9d96b0faec1115c7afb97aa2a8ac17a93d44637cd3e58ab91240b198b6d21c84a29129b586ff760f8f4ca8b1988c652b8f5ebd6ebaa0ffae6615c9aec5d
Bitcoin Core integration/staging tree
For an immediately usable, binary version of the Bitcoin Core software, see https://bitcoincore.org/en/download/.
What is Bitcoin Core?
Bitcoin Core connects to the Bitcoin peer-to-peer network to download and fully validate blocks and transactions. It also includes a wallet and graphical user interface, which can be optionally built.
Further information about Bitcoin Core is available in the doc folder.
License
Bitcoin Core is released under the terms of the MIT license. See COPYING for more information or see https://opensource.org/license/MIT.
Development Process
The master branch is regularly built (see doc/build-*.md for instructions) and tested, but it is not guaranteed to be
completely stable. Tags are created
regularly from release branches to indicate new official, stable release versions of Bitcoin Core.
The https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui repository is used exclusively for the development of the GUI. Its master branch is identical in all monotree repositories. Release branches and tags do not exist, so please do not fork that repository unless it is for development reasons.
The contribution workflow is described in CONTRIBUTING.md and useful hints for developers can be found in doc/developer-notes.md.
Testing
Testing and code review is the bottleneck for development; we get more pull requests than we can review and test on short notice. Please be patient and help out by testing other people's pull requests, and remember this is a security-critical project where any mistake might cost people lots of money.
Automated Testing
Developers are strongly encouraged to write unit tests for new code, and to
submit new unit tests for old code. Unit tests can be compiled and run
(assuming they weren't disabled during the generation of the build system) with: ctest. Further details on running
and extending unit tests can be found in /src/test/README.md.
There are also regression and integration tests, written
in Python.
These tests can be run (if the test dependencies are installed) with: build/test/functional/test_runner.py
(assuming build is your build directory).
The CI (Continuous Integration) systems make sure that every pull request is tested on Windows, Linux, and macOS. The CI must pass on all commits before merge to avoid unrelated CI failures on new pull requests.
Manual Quality Assurance (QA) Testing
Changes should be tested by somebody other than the developer who wrote the code. This is especially important for large or high-risk changes. It is useful to add a test plan to the pull request description if testing the changes is not straightforward.
Translations
Changes to translations as well as new translations can be submitted to Bitcoin Core's Transifex page.
Translations are periodically pulled from Transifex and merged into the git repository. See the translation process for details on how this works.
Important: We do not accept translation changes as GitHub pull requests because the next pull from Transifex would automatically overwrite them again.