[ralph-bitgo]

What

Acceptance suites for the fail-closed EVM TSS verifier:

• sdk-coin-evm tssVerification.ts (runs on kavaevm, legacy non-EIP-1559, and hbarevm, EIP-1559):
  • INFOSEC-671 cases: mismatched destination, mismatched value, mismatched calldata and missing recipients each flagged (warn + onVerificationWarning by default, throw under strictTssVerification); contractCall / customTx reject outright in both modes.
  • TOB-BITGOEDMPC-2: approve(attacker, MAX) disguised as a transfer / payment flagged.
  • Payment shapes: native to/value mismatches keep throwing; exact dApp to/value/data equality; ERC-20 wrong to, non-zero value, tampered inner recipient/amount (existing checks throw); ERC-7984 confidentialTransfer recipient-only; batch calldata under a single recipient; tokenApproval non-max allowance / non-approve calldata / native value / wrong to; fillNonce deviations; unhandled intent types (acceleration, bridgeFunds, enableToken, defiRedeem, stakeWithCallData) flagged instead of silently passing.
  • Pending-approval path built with resolveEffectiveTxParams(txRequest, undefined) + stored intent: redirect and inflated value throw through the existing native checks, swapped calldata flags; stored defi-approve / defi-deposit / defi-withdraw intents verify with intent-mapped defiParams (tampered amounts rejected — no silent skip); defi-redeem flagged.
  • Statics-gap paths (no configured batcher on kavaevm/hbarevm) flagged, and the onVerificationWarning payload contract (decoded vs expected to/value/data).
• sdk-coin-bsc tssBatcherVerification.ts (tbsc has a real statics batcher): native batch(address[],uint256[]) and token batchTransferFrom(address,address[],uint256[]) happy paths and mismatches (swapped inner recipients, inflated value, wrong to, wrong token), selector pinning (0xc00c4e9e / 0x4885b254), and tokenApproval approve(batcher, MAX) vs approve(attacker, MAX).

Why

The verifier changes what EVM TSS signing accepts (TOB-BITGOEDMPC-2 / INFOSEC-671). The audit cases and their pending-approval, batch, legacy-chain and statics-gap variants need regression coverage so the checks cannot silently regress.

Test plan

• sdk-coin-evm and sdk-coin-bsc suites green; BitGo SDK CI green on the head rebased onto current master. Current counts including part 4's additions: sdk-coin-evm 124, sdk-coin-bsc 56.
• Pending: prod backtest replaying ~563k EVM TSS payments from the last 90 days through the verifier, expecting no unexplained rejection of legitimate payments. Release gate tracked on CECHO-2460; not reproducible in CI.

Stack

This PR is part 3 of 4; review and merge in order:

1. fix(sdk-core): carry TSS intent and strict policy to verifyTransaction #9972 — sdk-core intent + strict policy plumbing (base: master)
2. fix(abstract-eth): fail-closed EVM TSS handlers for verifyTssTransaction #9973 — abstract-eth fail-closed verifier (base: CECHO-2460-evm-tss-fail-closed-handlers-pt1)
3. test(sdk-coin-evm): cover fail-closed EVM TSS verification paths #9975 — verification test suites (base: CECHO-2460-evm-tss-fail-closed-handlers-pt2) ← you are here
4. fix(abstract-eth): verify EVM TSS payments against declared asset #10114 — caller-declared intent and asset binding (base: CECHO-2460-evm-tss-fail-closed-handlers-pt3)

Ticket: CECHO-2460

[linear-code]

CECHO-2460

[github-actions]

⚠️ Compatibility checks are failing on Node.js 27-nightly (experimental, non-blocking). This does not block merge, but it signals an incompatibility to fix before this release becomes supported.

View run

[claude]

Claude Code Review

This repository is configured for manual code reviews. Comment @claude review for a one-time review, or @claude review always to subscribe this PR to a review on every future push.

_{Tip: disable this comment in your organization's Code Review settings.}

[dpkjnr]

Superseded by #10121, which carries the whole CECHO-2460 stack as three commits against master. Its tree is byte-identical to the head of #10114, so this PR's changes, part 3 (verification test suites), are all there. The stack couldn't land piece by piece: #9972 relaxes the DeFi recipient guard that #9973's handlers rely on, and #10114 rewrote the core of #9973. Closing in favor of #10121; the branch is kept.