seems like a good point to me.

timelocks give you an extra layer of failsafe for errors YOU commit, but don't seem to offer much against a motivated attacker.

I suppose this could be useful for address substitution attacks, which are common. But you can also mitigate address substitution by basically double checking everything and not being sloppy.

All of it amounts to this type of protection just IMHO not being that useful. The same applies to the covenants proposals that provide vaults with for-a-time recoverable funds.

am I missing anything?