If the contact is already introduced by someone,
usually by adding to a verified group,
it should not be reverified because of another
chat message is a verified group.
This usually results is verification loops
and is not meaningful because the verifier
likely got this same contact introduced
in the same group.
The icon is mainly used to identify unencrypted chats
in the chatlist where encrypted and unencrypted chats are mixed.
It is used for group chats rather than only for 1:1 chats
with address-contacts.
We don't want to prefer returning verified contacts because e.g. if a bot was reinstalled and its
key changed, it may not be verified, and we don't want to bring the user to the old chat if they
click on the bot email address. But trying to return accepted contacts increases security and
doesn't break the described scenario.
If an address-contact and a key-contact were seen at exactly the same time, that doesn't necessarily
mean that it's a random event, it might occur because some code updates contacts this way in some
scenario. While this is unlikely, prefer to look up the key-contact.
We have some debug assertions already, but we also want the corresponding errors in the release
configuration so that it's not less reliable than non-optimized one. This doesn't change any
function signatures, only debug assertions in functions returning `Result` are replaced.
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.
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>
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>
otherwise, by tuning down the email addresses,
one does not really has and idea who is SELF.
maybe the dialog is the only way at the end to get the transport
adresses of contacts,
this is unclear atm, this PR fixes the issue at hand
This API allows to explicitly set
a name of the contact
instead of trying to create a new contact
with the same address.
Not all contacts are identified
by the email address
and we are going to introduce
contacts identified by their keys.
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
Using `repeat_vars()` to generate SQL statements led to some of them having more than
`SQLITE_MAX_VARIABLE_NUMBER` parameters and thus failing, so let's get rid of this pattern. But
let's not optimise for now and just repeat executing an SQL statement in a loop, all the places
where `repeat_vars()` is used seem not performance-critical and containing functions execute other
SQL statements in loops. If needed, performance can be improved by preparing a statement and
executing it in a loop. An exception is `lookup_chat_or_create_adhoc_group()` where `repeat_vars()`
can't be replaced with a query loop, there we need to replace the `SELECT` query with a read
transaction creating a temporary table which is used to perform the SELECT query then.
This implements new group consistency algorithm described in
<https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-core-rust/issues/6401>
New `Chat-Group-Member-Timestamps` header is added
to send timestamps of member additions and removals.
Member is part of the chat if its addition timestamp
is greater or equal to the removal timestamp.
SQL statements fail if the number of variables
exceeds `SQLITE_LIMIT_VARIABLE_NUMBER`.
Remaining repeat_vars() calls are difficult to replace
and use arrays passed from the UI,
e.g. forwarded message IDs or marked as seen IDs.
This PR:
- Moves the note about the false positive to the end of the test output,
where it is more likely to be noticed
- Also notes in test_modify_chat_disordered() and
test_setup_contact_*(), in addition to the existing note in
test_was_seen_recently()
3f9242a saves name from all QR codes to `name` (i.e. manually edited name), but for SecureJoin QR
codes the name should be saved to `authname` because such QR codes are generated by the
inviter. Other QR codes may be generated locally and not only by Delta Chat, so the name from them
mustn't go to `authname` and be revealed to the network or other contacts.
Follow-up to 5fa7cff46. Let's still not send a sync message if the contact wasn't modified. This is
not very important, but just for consistency with the `chat::rename_ex()` behaviour.
