-
Martin
Does any client implement `XEP-0421: Anonymous unique occupant identifiers for MUCs`?
-
jonas’
what do you mean by "support"?
-
jonas’
it’s a server-side feature, isn’t it?
-
jonas’
a client may make beneficial use of this though
-
Martin
Make use of it, e.g. for LMC?
-
Martin
Right now you don't see it LMCed when you were not joined by that time.
-
jonas’
hm, I should add the 10 lines necessary to support it in aioxmpp ;)
-
jonas’
then jabbercat can do it
-
Martin
:)
-
jonas’
ah, though, to do it securely I’d have to disco#info the MUC on join… a thing I still don’t do :/
-
jonas’
aaaaalso the thing needs an addendum in the security considerations, neat
-
Link Mauve
Or we could you know, move it inside of the <{muc}x/>.
-
Link Mauve
Ah hmm, that’d work only for presences, not messages.
-
Link Mauve
Nvm.
-
pep.
jonas’, which part of security considerations?
-
jonas’
pep., the part where it doesn’t say that a client MUST NOT rely on occupant-id unless the feature was discovered on the MUC
-
pep.
Ah what you said
-
pep.
hmm wait
-
pep.
I thought it said something like that
-
jonas’
it doesn’t
-
pep.
Not in security considerations
-
pep.
“The <occupant-id> element MUST be ignored if support for the feature is not announced via Service Discovery (XEP-0030) [4], as malicious clients might forge occupant identifiers if the room does not support them.”
-
jonas’
needs mentioning in the SC then
-
pep.
Sure, might be good to move it / repeat it there
-
jonas’
jupp