Hi,

Le mardi 2 juin 2026, 19:30:10 heure d’été d’Europe centrale techmetx11 via 
Standards a écrit :
> As it's written in the specs, I think the challenge protocol can be 
> abused to leak a user's presence, because any device associated to the 
> target user *MUST* send a message to the entity who requested the 
> challenge, as soon as it receives it.

Indeed, that something to change, it should probably be answered only to people 
with presence access. 

> 
> This would violate RFC 6121's guarantees to not leak the user's network 
> availability to an entity who's not authorized to know about it.
> 
> So, I'm wondering if we could instead have the identity verification be 
> a secondary optional method of verification, and have something like a 
> signature of the JID (signed by the XID) in the user's PEP node, that 
> the user themself HAVE to re-sign once every so often, like a month or 
> week to ensure it remains valid, so that old hosts cannot impersonate 
> users with stale signatures.

That sounds like a good option.

Best,
Goffi

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to