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>
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.
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>
Found and fixed a bug while investigating
https://github.com/chatmail/core/issues/6656. It's not the same bug,
though.
Steps to reproduce this bug:
- Create a new profile
- Transfer it to a second device
- Send a message from the first device
- -> It will never arrive on the second device, instead a warning will
be printed that you are using DC on multiple devices.
The bug was that the key wasn't created before the backup transfer, so
that the second device then created its own key instead of using the
same key as the first device.
In order to regression-test, this PR now changes `clone()` to use "Add
second device" instead of exporting and importing a backup. Exporting
and importing a backup has enough tests already.
This PR also adds an unrelated test `test_selfavatar_sync()`.
The bug was introduced by https://github.com/chatmail/core/pull/6574 in
v1.156.0
Replacing default key
when a profile is already part of
verified groups results in
`[The message was sent with non-verified encryption. See 'Info' for more details]`
messages for other users.
It is still possible
to import the default key before
Delta Chat generates the key.
When there is a broken group (which might happen with multi-transport),
people want to leave it.
The problem is that every "Group left" message notifies all other
members and pops up the chat, so that other members also want to leave
the group.
This PR makes it so that "Group left" messages don't create a
notification, don't cause a number-in-a-cirle badge counter on the chat,
and don't sort up the chat in the chatlist.
If a group is deleted, then the group won't pop up when someone leaves
it; this worked fine already before this PR, and there also is a test
for it.
This makes it so that files will be deduplicated when using the JsonRPC
API.
@nicodh and @WofWca you know the Desktop code and how it is using the
API, so, you can probably tell me whether this is a good way of changing
the JsonRPC code - feel free to push changes directly to this PR here!
This PR here changes the existing functions instead of creating new
ones; we can alternatively create new ones if it allows for a smoother
transition.
This brings a few changes:
- If you pass a file that is already in the blobdir, it will be renamed
to `<hash>.<extension>` immediately (previously, the filename on the
disk stayed the same)
- If you pass a file that's not in the blobdir yet, it will be copied to
the blobdir immediately (previously, it was copied to the blobdir later,
when sending)
- If you create a file and then pass it to `create_message()`, it's
better to directly create it in the blobdir, since it doesn't need to be
copied.
- You must not write to the files after they were passed to core,
because otherwise, the hash will be wrong. So, if Desktop recodes videos
or so, then the video file mustn't just be overwritten. What you can do
instead is write the recoded video to a file with a random name in the
blobdir and then create a new message with the new attachment. If
needed, we can also create a JsonRPC for `set_file_and_deduplicate()`
that replaces the file on an existing message.
In order to test whether everything still works, the desktop issue has a
list of things to test:
https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-desktop/issues/4498
Core issue: #6265
---------
Co-authored-by: l <link2xt@testrun.org>
Python 3.7 is not supported on GitHub Actions ubuntu-latest runner:
https://github.com/actions/setup-python/issues/962
Python 3.7 has reached EOL more than 1 year ago anyway,
so not worth the effort supporting it.
- **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
