this PR adds a info message "messages are end-to-end-encrypted" also for
chats created by eg. vcards. by the removal of lock icons, this is a
good place to hint for that in addition; this is also what eg. whatsapp
and others are doing
the wording itself is tweaked at
https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-android/pull/3817 (and there is
also the rough idea to make the message a little more outstanding, by
some more dedicated colors)
~~did not test in practise, if this leads to double "e2ee info messages"
on secure join, tests look good, however.~~ EDIT: did lots of practise
tests meanwhile :)
most of the changes in this PR are about test ...
ftr, in another PR, after 2.0 reeases, there could probably quite some
code cleanup wrt set-protection, protection-disabled etc.
---------
Co-authored-by: Hocuri <hocuri@gmx.de>
A donation request device message is added if >= 100 messages have been sent and delivered. The
condition is checked every 30 days since the first message is sent. The message is added only once.
Part of #6884.
The channel owner will not be notified in any way that you left, they
will only see that there is one member less.
For the translated stock strings, this is what we agreed on in the
group:
- Add a new "Leave Channel" stock string (will need to be done in UIs)
- Reword the existing "Are you sure you want to leave this group?"
string to "Are you sure you want to leave?" (the options are "Cancel"
and "Leave Group" / "Leave Channel", so it's clear what you are leaving)
(will need to be done in the deltachat-android repo, other UIs will pick
it up automatically)
- Reword the existing "You left the group." string to "You left". (done
here, I will adapt the strings in deltachat-android, too)
I adapted DC Android by pushing
6df2740884
to https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-android/pull/3783.
---------
Co-authored-by: l <link2xt@testrun.org>
Part of #6884
----
- [x] Add new chat type `InBroadcastChannel` and `OutBroadcastChannel`
for incoming / outgoing channels, where the former is similar to a
`Mailinglist` and the latter is similar to a `Broadcast` (which is
removed)
- Consideration for naming: `InChannel`/`OutChannel` (without
"broadcast") would be shorter, but less greppable because we already
have a lot of occurences of `channel` in the code. Consistently calling
them `BcChannel`/`bc_channel` in the code would be both short and
greppable, but a bit arcane when reading it at first. Opinions are
welcome; if I hear none, I'll keep with `BroadcastChannel`.
- [x] api: Add create_broadcast_channel(), deprecate
create_broadcast_list() (or `create_channel()` / `create_bc_channel()`
if we decide to switch)
- Adjust code comments to match the new behavior.
- [x] Ask Desktop developers what they use `is_broadcast` field for, and
whether it should be true for both outgoing & incoming channels (or look
it up myself)
- I added `is_out_broadcast_channel`, and deprecated `is_broadcast`, for
now
- [x] When the user changes the broadcast channel name, immediately show
this change on receiving devices
- [x] Allow to change brodacast channel avatar, and immediately apply it
on the receiving device
- [x] Make it possible to block InBroadcastChannel
- [x] Make it possible to set the avatar of an OutgoingChannel, and
apply it on the receiving side
- [x] DECIDE whether we still want to use the broadcast icon as the
default icon or whether we want to use the letter-in-a-circle
- We decided to use the letter-in-a-circle for now, because it's easier
to implement, and I need to stay in the time plan
- [x] chat.rs: Return an error if the user tries to modify a
`InBroadcastChannel`
- [x] Add automated regression tests
- [x] Grep for `broadcast` and see whether there is any other work I
need to do
- [x] Bug: Don't show `~` in front of the sender's same in broadcast
lists
----
Note that I removed the following guard:
```rust
if !new_chat_contacts.contains(&ContactId::SELF) {
warn!(
context,
"Received group avatar update for group chat {} we are not a member of.", chat.id
);
} else if !new_chat_contacts.contains(&from_id) {
warn!(
context,
"Contact {from_id} attempts to modify group chat {} avatar without being a member.",
chat.id,
);
} else [...]
```
i.e. with this change, non-members will be able to modify the avatar.
Things were slightly easier this way, and I think that this is in line
with non-members being able to modify the group name and memberlist
(they need to know the Group-Chat-Id, anyway), but I can also change it
back.
We need this because it's not clear whether Android should switch to
JsonRPC for everything, because of concerns that JsonRPC might be a lot
slower than the CFFI (although we still need to measure that).
This change introduces a new type of contacts
identified by their public key fingerprint
rather than an e-mail address.
Encrypted chats now stay encrypted
and unencrypted chats stay unencrypted.
For example, 1:1 chats with key-contacts
are encrypted and 1:1 chats with address-contacts
are unencrypted.
Groups that have a group ID are encrypted
and can only contain key-contacts
while groups that don't have a group ID ("adhoc groups")
are unencrypted and can only contain address-contacts.
JSON-RPC API `reset_contact_encryption` is removed.
Python API `Contact.reset_encryption` is removed.
"Group tracking plugin" in legacy Python API was removed because it
relied on parsing email addresses from system messages with regexps.
Co-authored-by: Hocuri <hocuri@gmx.de>
Co-authored-by: iequidoo <dgreshilov@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: B. Petersen <r10s@b44t.com>
this PR moves now advanced/unsupported ASM strings to core, removing
work from translations, esp. as another hint is added which would
require retranslations. it is better to have that just in english, it is
a nerd feature anyways.
moverover, this PR removes special rendering of ASM in the summary,
which might be confusion, but mainly it is now unneeded, dead code
i'll do another android PR that will point to "Add Second Device"
already on ASM generation EDIT: done at
https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-android/pull/3726
targets https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-desktop/issues/4946
instead of showing addresses in info message, provide an API to get the
contact-id.
UI can then make the info message tappable and open the contact profile
in scope
the corresponding iOS PR - incl. **screencast** - is at
https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-ios/pull/2652 ; jsonrpc can come
in a subsequent PR when things are settled on android/ios
the number of parameters in `add_info_msg_with_cmd` gets bigger and
bigger, however, i did not want to refactor this in this PR. it is also
not really adding complexity
closes#6702
---------
Co-authored-by: link2xt <link2xt@testrun.org>
Co-authored-by: Hocuri <hocuri@gmx.de>
Now that we are deduplicating everywhere, we can get rid of some code.
The old python bindings did not get an optional `name` parameter because
they are deprecated anyway, but it would be easy to add it.
> _greetings from the ice of the deutsche bahn 🚂🚃🚃🚃 always a pleasure to
see how well delta chat meanwhile performs in bad networks :)_
this PR adds an API to request other chat members to replace the message
text of an already sent message. scope is mainly to fix typos. this
feature is known from whatsapp, telegram, signal, and is
[requested](https://support.delta.chat/t/retract-edit-sent-messages/1918)
[since](https://support.delta.chat/t/edit-messages-in-delta-chat/899)
[years](https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-android/issues/198).
technically, a message with an
[`Obsoletes:`](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2076#section-3.6)
header is sent out.
```
From: alice@nine
To: bob@nine
Message-ID: 2000@nine
In-Reply-To: 1000@nine
Obsoletes: 1000@nine
Edited: this is the new text
```
the body is the new text, prefixed by the static text `Edited:` (which
is not a header). the latter is to make the message appear more nicely
in Non-Delta-MUA. save for the `In-Reply-To` header. the `Edited:`
prefix is removed by Delta Chat on receiving.
headers should be protected and moved to e2ee part as usual.
corrected message text is flagged, and UI should show this state, in
practise as "Edited" beside the date.
in case, the original message is not found, nothing happens and the
correction message is trashes (assuming the original was deleted).
question: is the `Obsoletes:` header a good choice? i _thought_ there is
some more specifica RFC, but i cannot find sth. in any case, it should
be an header that is not used otherwise by MUA, to make sure no wanted
messages disappear.
what is NOT done and out of scope:
- optimise if messages are not yet sent out. this is doable, but
introduces quite some cornercaes and may not be worth the effort
- replaces images or other attachments. this is also a bit cornercasy
and beyond "typo fixing", and better be handled by "delete for me and
others" (which may come soon, having the idea now, it seems easy :)
- get edit history in any way. not sure if this is worth the effort,
remember, as being a private messenger, we assume trust among chat
members. it is also questionable wrt privacy, seized devices etc.
- add text where nothing was before; again, scope is "typo fixing",
better avoid cornercases
- saved messages are not edited (this is anyway questionable)
- quoted texts, that are used for the case the original message is
deleted, are not updated
- edits are ignored when the original message is not there yet (out of
order, not yet downloaded)
- message status indicator does not show if edits are sent out or not -
similar to reactions, webxdc updates, sync messages. signal has the same
issue :) still, connectivity should show if there are messages pending
<img width="366" alt="Screenshot 2025-02-17 at 17 25 02"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a4a53996-438b-47ef-9004-2c9062eea5d7"
/>
corresponding iOS branch (no PR yet):
https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-ios/compare/main...r10s/edit-messages
---------
Co-authored-by: l <link2xt@testrun.org>
Deduplicate:
- In the REPL
- In `store_from_base64()`, which writes avatars received in headers
- In a few tests
- The saved messages, broadcast, device, archive icons
- The autocrypt setup message
1-2 more PRs, and we can get rid of `BlobObject::create`,
`sanitise_name()`, and some others
When receiving messages, blobs will be deduplicated with the new
function `create_and_deduplicate_from_bytes()`. For sending files, this
adds a new function `set_file_and_deduplicate()` instead of
deduplicating by default.
This is for
https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-core-rust/issues/6265; read the
issue description there for more details.
TODO:
- [x] Set files as read-only
- [x] Don't do a write when the file is already identical
- [x] The first 32 chars or so of the 64-character hash are enough. I
calculated that if 10b people (i.e. all of humanity) use DC, and each of
them has 200k distinct blob files (I have 4k in my day-to-day account),
and we used 20 chars, then the expected value for the number of name
collisions would be ~0.0002 (and the probability that there is a least
one name collision is lower than that) [^1]. I added 12 more characters
to be on the super safe side, but this wouldn't be necessary and I could
also make it 20 instead of 32.
- Not 100% sure whether that's necessary at all - it would mainly be
necessary if we might hit a length limit on some file systems (the
blobdir is usually sth like
`accounts/2ff9fc096d2f46b6832b24a1ed99c0d6/dc.db-blobs` (53 chars), plus
64 chars for the filename would be 117).
- [x] "touch" the files to prevent them from being deleted
- [x] TODOs in the code
For later PRs:
- Replace `BlobObject::create(…)` with
`BlobObject::create_and_deduplicate(…)` in order to deduplicate
everytime core creates a file
- Modify JsonRPC to deduplicate blob files
- Possibly rename BlobObject.name to BlobObject.file in order to prevent
confusion (because `name` usually means "user-visible-name", not "name
of the file on disk").
[^1]: Calculated with both https://printfn.github.io/fend/ and
https://www.geogebra.org/calculator, both of which came to the same
result
([1](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/bbb62550-3781-48b5-88b1-ba0e29c28c0d),
[2](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/82171212-b797-4117-a39f-0e132eac7252))
---------
Co-authored-by: l <link2xt@testrun.org>
> _took quite some time until i found the time to finish this PR and to
find a time window that does not disturb other developments too much,
but here we are:_
this PR enables UI to improve "Saved messages" hugely, bringing it on
WhatsApp's "Starred Messages" or Telegram's "Saved Messages" level. with
this PR, UIs can add the following functionality with few effort ([~100
loc on iOS](https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-ios/pull/2527)):
- add a "Save" button in the messages context menu, allowing to save a
message
- show directly in the chat if a message was saved, eg. by a little star
★
- in "Saved Messages", show the message in its context - so with author,
avatar, date and keep incoming/outgoing state
- in "Saved Messages", a button to go to the original message can be
added
- if the original message was deleted, one can still go to the original
chat
these features were often requested, in the forum, but also in many
one-to-one discussions, recently at the global gathering.
moreover, in contrast to the old method with "forward to saved", no
traffic is wasted - the messages are saved locally, and only a small
sync messages is sent around
this is how it looks out on iOS:
<img width="260" alt="Screenshot 2025-01-17 at 00 02 51"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/902741b6-167f-4af1-9f9a-bd0439dd20d0"
/> <img width="353" alt="Screenshot 2025-01-17 at 00 05
33"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/97eceb79-6e43-4a89-9792-2e077e7141cd"
/>
technically, still a copy is done from the original message (with
already now deduplicated blobs), so that things work nicely with
deletion modes; eg. you can save an important message and preserve it
from deletion that way.
jsonrpc can be done in a subsequent PR, i was implementing the UI on iOS
where that was not needed (and most API were part of message object that
is not in use in jsonrpc atm)
@hpk42 the forward issue we discussed earller that day is already solved
(first implementation did not had an explict save_msgs() but was using
forward_msgs(SELF) as saving - with the disadvantage that forwarding to
SELF is not working, eg. if one wants the old behaviour) acutally, that
made the PR a lot nicer, as now very few existing code is changed
<details>
<summary>previous considerations and abandoned things</summary>
while working on this PR, there was also the idea to just set a flag
“starred” in the message table and not copy anything. however, while
tempting, that would result in more complexity, questions and drawbacks
in UI:
- delete-message, delete-chat, auto-deletion, clear-chat would raise
questions - what do do with the “Starred”? having a copy in “Saved
Messages” does not raise this question
- newly saved messages appear naturally as “new” in “Saved Messages”,
simply setting a flag would show them somewhere in between - unless we
do additional effort
- “Saved Messages” already has its place in the UI - and allows to
_directly_ save things there as well - not easily doable with “starring”
- one would need to re-do many things that already exist in “Saved
Messages”, at least in core
- one idea to solve some of the issues could be to have “Starred” as
well as “Saved Messages” - however, that would irritate user, one would
remember exactly what was done with a message, and understand the fine
differences
whatsapp does this “starred”, btw, so when original is deleted, starred
is deleted as well. Telegram does things similar to us, Signal does
nothing. Whatsapp has a per-chat view for starred messages - if needed,
we could do sth. like that as well, however, let’s first see how far the
“all view” goes (in contrast to whatsapp, we have profiles for
separation as well)
for the wording: “saving” is what we’re doing here, this is much more on
point as “starring” - which is more the idea of a “bookmark”, and i
think, whatsapp uses this wording to not raise false expectations
(still, i know of ppl that were quite upset that a “starred” message was
deleted when eg. the chat was cleared to save some memory)
wrt webxdc app updates: options that come into mind were: _empty_ (as
now), _snapshot_ (copy all updates) or _shortcut_ (always open
original). i am not sure what the best solution is, the easiest was
_empty_, so i went for that, as it is (a) obvious, and what is already
done with forwarding and (b) the original is easy to open now (in
contrast to forwarding).
so, might totally be that we need or want to tweak things here, but i
would leave that outside the first iteration, things are not worsened in
that area
wrt reactions: as things are detached, similar to webxdc updates, we do
not not to show the original reactions - that way, one can use reactions
for private markers (telegram is selling that feature :)
to the icon: a disk or a bookmark might be other options, but the star
is nicer and also know from other apps - and anyways a but vague UX
wise. so i think, it is fine
finally, known issue is that if a message was saved that does not exist
on another device, it does not get there. i think, that issue is a weak
one, and can be ignored mostly, most times, user will save messages soon
after receiving, and if on some devices auto-deletion is done, it is
maybe not even expected to have suddenly another copy there
</details>
EDIT: once this is merged, detailed issues about what to do should be
filed for android/desktop (however, they do not have urgency to adapt,
things will continue working as is)
---------
Co-authored-by: Hocuri <hocuri@gmx.de>
A NDN may arrive days after the message is sent when it's already impossible to tell which message
wasn't delivered looking at the "Failed to send" info message, so it only clutters the chat and
makes the user think they tried to send some message recently which isn't true. Moreover, the info
message duplicates the info already displayed in the error message behind the exclamation mark and
info messages do not point to the message that is failed to be sent.
Moreover it works rarely because `mimeparser.rs` only parses recipients from `x-failed-recipients`,
so it likely only works for Gmail. Postfix does not add this `X-Failed-Recipients` header. Let's
remove this parsing too. Thanks to @link2xt for pointing this out.
Also cleaned up test_connectivity()
which tested that state does not flicker to WORKING
when there are no messages to be fetched.
The state is expected to flicker to WORKING
when checking for new messages,
so the tests were outdated since
change 3b0b2379b8
this PR adds the `href` from `update.href` to the IncomingWebxdcNotify
event (DC_EVENT_INCOMING_WEBXDC_NOTIFY in cffi)
purpose is to add a "Start" button to the notifications that allow
starting the app immediately with the given href
- **feat: add `AccountsChanged` and `AccountsItemChanged` events**
- **emit event and add tests**
closes#6106
TODO:
- [x] test receiving synced config from second device
- [x] bug: investigate how to delay the configuration event until it is
actually configured - because desktop gets the event but still shows
account as if it was unconfigured, maybe event is emitted before the
value is written to the database?
- [x] update node bindings constants
this PR removes most usages of the `descr` parameter.
- to avoid noise in different branches etc. (as annoying on similar, at
a first glance simple changes), i left the external API stable
- also, the effort to do a database migration seems to be over the top,
so the column is left and set to empty strings on future updates - maybe
we can recycle the column at some point ;)
closes#6245
add `update.href` property option to update objects send via
`Context::send_webxdc_status_update()`.
when set together with `update.info`,
UI can implement the info message as a link that is passed to the webxdc
via `window.location.href`.
for that purpose, UI will read the link back from
`Message::get_webxdc_href()`.
Practically,
this allows e.g. an calendar.xdc
to emits clickable update messages
opening the calendar at the correct date.
closes#6219
documentation at https://github.com/webxdc/website/pull/90
I found the old documentation rather hard to understand. The new doc
string:
- uses whole sentences, leaving less space for misinterpretation
- explicitly mentions that it can happen that there is no
webxdc-info-message
- is clearly structured using bullet points.
this PR adds support for the property `update.notify` to notify about
changes in `update.info` or `update.summary`. the property can be set to
an array of addresses [^1]
core emits then the event `IncomingWebxdcNotify`, resulting in all UIs
to display a system notification, maybe even via PUSH.
for using the existing `update.info` and `update.summary`: the message
is no secret and should be visible to all group members as usual, to not
break the UX of having same group messages on all devices of all users -
as known already from the normal messages.
also, that way, there is no question what happens if user have disabled
notifications as the change is presented in the chat as well
doc counterpart at https://github.com/webxdc/website/pull/90closes#6217
[^1]: addresses come in either via the payload as currently or as an
explicit sender in the future - this does not affect this PR. same for
translations, see discussions at #6217 and #6097
---------
Co-authored-by: adb <asieldbenitez@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: l <link2xt@testrun.org>
this PR adds the address to be used by the UI for
`window.webxdc.selfAddr` to webxdc-info. UIs need to be changed
accordingly and must not use configured_addr any longer.
the address is created by sha256(private-key + rfc724_mid) , which
results in different addresses for each webxdc, without the option to
find out the real address of the user.
this also returns the same address for a multi-device-setup - sending
totally random self address around might be an alternative, however
would require connectivity (both devices may be offline on first start).
for existing app, after the change, there will be a new user, resulting
eg. in a new highscore, otherwise, things should be mostly fine. this
assumption is also important as we might change the thing another time
when it comes to multi-transport.
ftr, addresses look like
`0f187e3f420748b03e3da76543e9a84ecff822687ce7e94f250c04c7c50398bc` now
when this is merged, we need to adapt #6230 and file issues for all UI
to use `info.selfAddr`
closes#6216
