[BenWestgate]

Before: some CLI messages repeated another message or sat behind a check that an earlier check already makes unreachable:

• create said "Only Bitcoin master-seed backups can be created." after the header parser had already required ms1.
• create checked "Use --existing when supplying a seed or secret." after it had already required an interactive terminal.
• Wallet commands said "Wallet commands accept only Bitcoin master-seed secrets." after input had already been limited to ms.
• A header collision appended "; choose another set header" to the library's "new share set must use a different set header".
• The "Use blank wallet …? [y/N]" prompt was written out three times.

After: each message lives in one place. What users see is unchanged, except that a header collision now prints only the library sentence.

How: one commit removes the four checks and adds a small use() helper inside _select. Library: 4,859 to 4,844 logical lines. It's stacked on #155; retarget to reviewability-v1 after #155 merges. #156 lists the remaining duplicates, which need a decision or a security review.

Checks: 909 tests pass, plus python -O -m pytest, mypy, ruff, verify_correction_constants and differential_correction. It touches no recovery, checksum or generation code.

Refs #156

---

Generated by Claude Code

[BenWestgate]

AI-assisted review at maintainer request.

Code ACK 50cbc19 (draft). The removed CLI checks are already enforced at input/header boundaries; factoring the wallet confirmation preserves the prompt. Tests not rerun here. Keep stacked on #155 until it merges.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-23T21:31:50.172724Z	50cbc19	Manual request

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[BenWestgate]

crACK

[BenWestgate]

Focused security review — commit 50cbc19a500e2b324cc144f85b4c8bbdfc03a567 (PR #157, relative to #155 at 377f2bc).

Security ACK: no reportable findings in the two-file diff.

• _master_seed: the removed runtime isinstance(MasterSeed) check was redundant at the current trusted-artifact boundary. _artifacts(profiles=(Profile.MS,)) validates and filters the HRP, parse_codex32 constructs MasterSeed for ms secrets, and recover_secret reparses the recovered secret. BitcoinCore.initialize also retains an independent MasterSeed type check.
• _create: _creation_header returns only Profile.MS or raises for other application prefixes; the remaining terminal guard rejects redirected input before Core connection or generation. The deleted not existing and not sys.stdin.isatty() branch was unreachable after that guard. Existing-source type, confirmation, identifier, and ceremony checks remain.
• HeaderCollision: its CodexError still reaches the general except CodexError handler and stops creation. Only the duplicated suggestion suffix is removed.
• BitcoinCore._select: the factored use(name) helper preserves all three explicit [y/N] prompts, exact affirmative choices (y/yes, case-insensitive), and rejection behavior. Eligibility is checked when listing candidates and rechecked after selection and before sensitive import; fingerprint/identity verification and relocking paths remain intact. No new bypass or sensitive-data output was found.

Read all changed source hunks and the relevant parsing, recovery, creation, Core eligibility/identity, and CLI call paths. Existing tests cover non-ms and redirected creation rejection, wallet-selection confirmations, unsafe-wallet filters, and identity gating. Exact-head GitHub CI passed: Python package run 39726929553 and Bitcoin Core wallet fixtures run 39726929557. The PR commit is absent from the local checkout, so tests were not rerun locally; this is a focused static security review supported by exact-head CI.

This sign-off applies to the current head 50cbc19, not future changes or the eventual fully integrated release candidate. Keep the #155 → #157 → #161 stack order and retest on the final integrated head.

[BenWestgate]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Already looking forward to the next diff.

Reviewed commit: 50cbc19a50

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[BenWestgate]

LGTM