On Donnerstag, 27. April 2017 22:37:19 CEST Georg Lukas wrote: > * Jonas Wielicki <[email protected]> [2017-04-27 19:24]: > > The UX is one thing. I’d first like to clear how N=1 would work > > implementation wise. > > Sorry, but this is doing it the wrong way around.
See below. > You can store a list > of tuples of (token, counter, max validity), either on the server or in > the client. This is how yaxim currently does PARS. You could define an > IQ to query the server for a new token, given a counter and a max > validity, and let the server implementation sort it out. This is the > easy part. Right, this however loses the advantage of Daniels proposal that it’s trivial for clients to substitute an incapable server. > The hard part is to define the right UX and the right security limits. Yes, that’s the hard part, I agree. However, first going for the hard part of UX while its unclear if there is a reasonable implementation at all (I hadn’t thought of the IQ thing you proposed, which would definitely work, too and I’m totally not a fan of those multi-item PEP node items) doesn’t seem quite reasonable to me either. If you’re convinced that a reasonable server-side implementation will be found, that’s fine with me. (Also, I was probably a bit too tired when I started thinking about this.) > I > think it is a security problem to have tokens that don't impose any > limits, Agreed. Note that there is a time limit though. > and I think that N=1 is a very sane default limit for > invitations. Agreed. But I am probably not a good indicator for UX. Can we take a look at how other services do this? Regarding N=\infty tokens, I see some valid use-cases for those, even though I’m unsure if those use-cases still work with time limits in place (e.g. inviting your whole family with a broadcast mail or something which they’re unlikely to read and act on within a reasonable validity time frame). Regarding the point you made eariler: > - pending subscriptions are a similar DoS in most clients as completed > subscriptions. This is maybe true for most *clients*, but consider users who have "only allow users in my roster / seeing my presence" rules in place. Auto-subscribed users are then much more harmful. regards, Jonas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
