flowMattJ, May I suggest to remove the "Servers MUST NOT include the <stanza-id/> element in messages addressed to JIDs that do not have permissions to access the archive" from xep313. It appears to provide very little, I'd even say nothing because the id-String shouldn't reveal anything, for a lot of complexity in the MAM archive service implementation
Danielhas left
Danielhas joined
lovetoxit does reveal something
lovetoxon ejabberd for example the exact timestamp of the message
MattJI think it would have to be tied with a requirement that ids do not leak any info
lovetoxyeah and this would be bad
MattJI'm not sure timestamp counts as a problem
MattJBut if it was combined with a counter it would
MattJAnd timestamps are not unique on their own
flowlovetox, well that would violate a MUST frmo xep359
flowalso I am not sure if timestamps are a problem
lovetoxits very useful that ejabberd uses timestamps as messages
lovetoxits very useful that ejabberd uses timestamps as ids
lovetoxas it allows to determine a order
lovetoxeven if impl cannot rely on it because other servers dont do that
MattJTell me you don't depend on that :)
flowfurthermore, we could at least relax the requirement in xep313, e.g. by making it conditional
lovetoxof course i dont, as not all servers do that
lovetoxwhen i remember correctly the only argument against a orderable id was
lovetoxclusters may be more complex to implement that
flowbut I would simply remove that requirement from xep313, which also would make the xep less complex, which is always good
pep.> MattJ> I think it would have to be tied with a requirement that ids do not leak any info
Isn't that the case already?
zachhas left
zachhas joined
pep.For 0359 stuff
pep.Hmm, it says "unique and stable" and recommends UUID..
pep.I think that's good enough
goffihas joined
adiaholichas left
deepakhas joined
Danielhas left
Danielhas joined
deepakhas left
lovetoxi see xep 0398 is under specified
marc_has joined
lovetoxit says "Upon receiving a vCard publication request with a valid photo attached"
Danielhas left
zachhas left
Danielhas joined
zachhas joined
lovetoxso no photo element is invalid in this case?
lovetoxmeans every client out there now has to publish empty photo elements in there vcard for avatar conversion to work?
lovetoxis this intended? why not just interpret no photoelement as <photo/>
lovetoxor did the XEP author foget about the "Delete a photo" usecase
lovetoxand this sentence reflects only setting a avatar other than none
lovetox^ Daniel
Danielyes the XEP doesn’t cover deletion
Danielyet
flowpep., see also the security section of xep359
pep.Right, so that's settled then
flowMattJ, xep359 already has that requirement that IDs do not leak inve, hence i was supprised to find that section in xep313
APachhas left
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
sonnyhas left
APachhas joined
adiaholichas joined
sonnyhas joined
lskdjfhas joined
mukt2has joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
mukt2has left
emushas joined
MattJpep.: "unique and stable" is not enough
zachhas left
zachhas joined
MattJWe've already seen security issues from far simpler and more obvious problems, it's not enough to say that a sentence in a separate document covers us
pep.MattJ, see what was said above
pep.0359 mandates more than that
emushas left
emushas joined
pep.- the IDs defined in this extension MUST be unique and stable within the scope of the generating XMPP entity
- Entities observing the value MUST NOT be able to infer any information from it
- The value of 'id' MUST be considered a non-secret value.
marc_has left
marc_has joined
pep.(obviously, "MUST NOT be able to infer any information from it" is only practical to some extent, but that wouldn't be an issue for MAM would it)
debaclehas left
emushas left
vanitasvitaehas left
Ge0rGI suggest to introduce a new stanza element, <mam-id>, that is not leaking any information.
zachhas left
zachhas joined
vanitasvitaehas joined
Ge0rGWith a "MUST NOT be equal to any of the other id elements or attributes of the message" requirement.
marc_has left
pdurbinhas left
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
Nekithas left
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
debaclehas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
COM8has joined
winfriedhas left
mukt2has joined
winfriedhas joined
COM8has left
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
Alexhas left
Alexhas joined
andyhas left
zachhas left
zachhas joined
andyhas joined
mukt2has left
j.rhas left
mukt2has joined
Mikaelahas left
Mikaelahas joined
j.rhas joined
APachhas left
zachhas left
zachhas joined
emushas joined
zachhas left
zachhas joined
APachhas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
mukt2has left
Nekithas joined
pdurbinhas joined
rionhas left
rionhas joined
j.rhas left
j.rhas joined
pdurbinhas left
zachhas left
zachhas joined
marc_has joined
MattJCan't tell if sarcasm
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
horsthas joined
APachhas left
APachhas joined
debaclehas left
horsthas left
zachhas left
zachhas joined
ZashIn https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0398.html#presence it's implied but not explicitly stated that the server should leave empty <photo/> elements alone. Why is that? (poke Daniel)
DanielIirc to give clients the option to join w/o avater
DanielNot that it really makes sense. But I think that was the intention behind it
zachhas left
zachhas joined
mukt2has joined
mukt2has left
zachhas left
zachhas joined
ZashSome clarification there would be good I think
pdurbinhas joined
waqashas joined
APachhas left
zachhas left
zachhas joined
APachhas joined
Kevhas joined
j.rhas left
pdurbinhas left
DanielQuick update on the IM regulation. I just (accidentally) talked to someone who was on the SPD's (major party in Germany) digital working group thing. And it was her that Katharina barley asked in 2018 about IM regulation. And she contacted the CCC who was like "mhh we don't really know". And now it's apparently dead because according to her the SPD is not in a functional state right now
zachhas left
zachhas joined
DanielCc Ge0rG
pep.What was that article then a week ago? :/
Danieldunno. i mean it did not have any sources. maybe it was old sources
Danielor just made up
pep.k
andyhas left
Kevhas left
Danielalso she asked for me contact information and i wrote down my website and my email address and then she asked for my phone number because she doesn’t write email; and under pressure I couldn’t remember it (why do people think that 10 random numbers are a good ID) - i gues s i need a business card
pep."why do people think that 10 random numbers are a good ID" haha, I agree, and that's not even because of the infamous Zooko.
Ge0rGDaniel: did you take her phone number at least?
zachhas left
zachhas joined
zachhas left
zachhas joined
jubalhhas joined
DanielGe0rG, no. it felt more like a "don’t call us we call you" situation
Nekithas left
j.rhas joined
Ge0rGDaniel: that's a bit sad.
Daniellast time i tried to talk to a politician she offered to take a selfie with me
pep."PR, PR, PR"?
Ge0rGDaniel: looks like you learned the hard way how modern politics work...
zachhas left
zachhas joined
jubalhhas left
fippodaniel: maybe she wanted the phone number to contact you via signal? :-p