Hi, by reading XEP-0191 section "5.3 User Blocks Contact":

----------------------------------
Once the user has blocked communications with the contact, the user's
server MUST NOT deliver any XML stanzas from the contact to the user.
The block remains in force until the user subsequently unblocks
commmunications with the contact (i.e., the duration of the block is
potentially unlimited and applies across sessions).

If the contact attempts to send a stanza to the user (i.e., an inbound
stanza from the user's perspective), the user's server shall handle
the stanza according to the following rules:

For presence stanzas (including notifications, subscriptions, and
probes), the server MUST NOT respond and MUST NOT return an error.
For message stanzas, the server SHOULD return an error, which SHOULD
be <service-unavailable/>.
For IQ stanzas of type "get" or "set", the server MUST return an
error, which SHOULD be <service-unavailable/>. IQ stanzas of other
types MUST be silently dropped by the server.
----------------------------------

Let's suppose alice and bob have mutual subscription.

1) Alice blocks bob (by inserting him in the blocklist).

2) The server sends "unavailable" presence stanza to bob.

3) Bob sends presence "probe" stanza to alice, so "the server MUST NOT
respond and MUST NOT return an error"

4) Bob sends message stanza to alice, so "the server SHOULD return an
error, which SHOULD be <service-unavailable/>".

5) Bob sends a IQ stanza to alice, so "the server MUST return an
error, which SHOULD be <service-unavailable/>. IQ stanzas of other
types MUST be silently dropped by the server.".


By inspecting the result of 3), 4) and 5), couldn't bob determine that
he has been blocked by alice?
This is, I don't know yet the XMPP protocol, but I expect that in case
alice allows bob's subscription and alice is not conected, when bob
sends a message stanza to alice the server would return something as
"not conected now" rather than "service unavailable", am I right? If
so bob can determines that alice has blocked him which IMHO is not a
desirable feature.

Thanks a lot for any explanation about it. Best regards.


-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<[email protected]>

Reply via email to