Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[WIPish] MSC1777: peeking over federation (via server pseudousers) #1777
[WIPish] MSC1777: peeking over federation (via server pseudousers) #1777
Changes from 2 commits
a6fd782
5d0281e
642b7cc
e6eb3d1
0c03815
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should the special user be allowed to post anything in the room? Because they'd be joined and hidden from the memberlist, it opens up a vector for abuse which is difficult to mitigate. Enforcing that the special case user is read only (with the exception of join and leave explicitly) would prevent most forms of abuse.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How does this work with other join_rules? What if you want knock but not peak? But the other way round? What if you want to be able to peak some things in a private room? etc.
It feels like it might be time to make the join_rules contain a set of features instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What happens to pseudousers if the join_rules become more restrictive after they have joined it. Does it work like current room semantics and keeps them joined, keeping the room peekable for servers who have peeked it once already?
(i.e I can see the situation where lots of servers peek your room, you downgrade from
peekable
and are surprised to learn it doesn't help you.)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Most definitely. It might be worth the extra effort to split out this particular change into a dedicated proposal so it can make it in to v2, leaving the specifics of how peeking work to this proposal. Only real reason would be we're cutting rooms v2 at the end of the month, and it'd be a bit annoying to have a v3 very shortly after (particularly if the change is just peeking - that's not a lot of motivation to update rooms, particularly when compared to v2's changelog).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If we're bumping the room version, might as well enforce the user being effectively read-only at the same time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I assume this would break
Pseudousers could potentially also act on behalf of ASes
since that would requite the user to write into the room?