Bitcoin Core developers are weighing a possible CJDNS exit after a review of the encrypted transport’s node health found the network resting on a very small base of reachable peers, a condition that raises eclipse-risk concerns for the users who route through it.
Bitcoin Core developers are weighing a possible CJDNS exit after a review of the encrypted transport’s node health found the network resting on a very small base of reachable peers, a condition that raises eclipse-risk concerns for the users who route through it. The discussion frames the potential removal of encrypted routing support as a security decision rather than a routine software change.
WHAT TO KNOW
CJDNS is an encrypted routing protocol that Bitcoin Core supports as one of the ways a node can reach the peer-to-peer network, alongside clearnet, Tor, and I2P. In the Bitcoin node context it is a privacy-oriented transport, giving operators an additional path to broadcast and receive blocks and transactions. For related coverage, see Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs Pull $2.6B in One Week.
The reconsideration is being driven by network health rather than a feature refresh. Reporting on the discussion notes that Bitcoin Core is considering dropping encrypted routing support after poor node health exposed users to eclipse attacks. The same fragility drew attention when Bitcoin Core questioned the privacy network’s small pool of healthy nodes.
An eclipse attack occurs when an adversary controls all of a node’s connections, isolating it from the honest network so it sees only attacker-supplied blocks and transactions. The danger is not theoretical: a fully eclipsed node can be fed a false view of the chain. For related coverage, see Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs Post Biggest Week of 2026.
Healthy peers matter here because they are the reachable, well-behaved nodes a client can actually connect to. When only a handful of them exist on a given transport, the pool of possible connections is thin enough that an attacker needs to control comparatively few endpoints to dominate a victim’s peer set. For related coverage, see River: 49.6 Million US Adults Own Bitcoin vs 28.8 Million Gold Owners.
That is the crux of the seven-peer framing. A small number of healthy peers is itself the vulnerability signal, because it shrinks the diversity of connections that normally makes eclipsing a node expensive and impractical. The tracking discussion for the issue is documented in the project’s GitHub issue thread. For related coverage, see Tether's $120M Uruguay Bitcoin Mining Project Collapsed.
If support is reduced or removed, the immediate effect falls on privacy-focused operators who use CJDNS as a connection path. Those nodes would need to rely on the remaining transports for reachability, changing how a subset of the network connects.
The debate reflects Bitcoin Core’s security-first posture: a transport that cannot muster enough healthy peers to resist eclipsing may create more risk than the privacy benefit it offers. The tradeoff is being weighed rather than treated as a foregone removal, and the framing is about resilience, not simply deleting a feature in isolation.
For the broader network, the significance is one of defense in depth. Bitcoin’s security model depends on nodes maintaining an honest, diverse set of connections so no single actor can control what a node sees, and the CJDNS review is a direct test of whether an encrypted transport still meets that bar.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Cryptocurrency and digital asset markets carry significant risk. Always do your own research before making decisions.
Quick access to the site tools and map-driven utility pages.
Follow the core desks readers use most across Bitcoin, altcoins, mining, events, and sponsored coverage.
© 2026 BitcoinInfoNews.com. All rights reserved.
Independent Bitcoin and crypto coverage with public trust, policy, and newsroom pages available sitewide.
