-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 98
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
Clarify when an event is returned from /send_join. #1840
Conversation
data/api/server-server/joins-v2.yaml
Outdated
field. The signed copy of the membership event sent to other servers by the resident server, | ||
including the resident server's signature. | ||
The signed copy of the membership event sent to other servers by the resident server. | ||
Required if the event is signed by the resident server. |
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.
So as the sender of the /send_join
request, should we still ensure that the signed event is present when performing a restricted join, as it must be signed in this case?
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 do you mean by present? Present when you get the room state?
As the joining server I think the important things to do are:
- Verify the signatures as with any event.
- Ensure this copy of the event is persisted locally and not the copy that was used to make the
/send_join
call.
I'd have to double check what synapse does to see if there's anything else though.
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 do you mean by present?
The signed event being returned in the event
field of the response.
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.
The signature needs to be checked (as is in the auth rules), Synapse does this @ https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/blob/23740eaa3da94fbe2e25180376961979fc4e8cd3/synapse/federation/federation_base.py#L238-L259.
I'm still unsure if that's your question or not though.
data/api/server-server/joins-v2.yaml
Outdated
field. The signed copy of the membership event sent to other servers by the resident server, | ||
including the resident server's signature. | ||
The signed copy of the membership event sent to other servers by the resident server. | ||
Required if the event is signed by the resident server. |
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.
Hrm. I think we need to clarify this a bit more. It just begs the question, "so when should the event be signed by the resident server".
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.
Would linking back to restricted joins be enough?
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.
Probably?
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 took another attempt at this, let me know what you think.
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.
LGTM
Fixes #1708.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Cloke clokep@patrick.cloke.us
Preview: https://pr1840--matrix-spec-previews.netlify.app