[Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0224 (Attention)

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Wed Nov 12 15:32:28 CST 2008

Jehan wrote:
> Hi again,
> Jehan;4925 Wrote: 
>> Hi,
>> 4. Maybe even from people authorized to send this kind of attention,
>> there should be some limit? Wouldn't it be an issue if some of my
>> contact were sending me a hundred of "attention" and if my screen would
>> keep shaking/vibrating/etc.?
> Just to be clearer on this point. I saw it was considered in the
> "implementation notes" section (just to prevent remarks :p), but I am
> pointing it as being a security concern rather that just an
> implementation choice.
> The same way it can be a problem to get attention from unknown people
> (it could be some kind of annoying attack, maybe not really harmful, but
> still annoying); even from people you "know", or have had at least some
> contact, it can be annoying too if they overdo "attention" queries (and
> you don't always know perfectly people in your roster anyway). Hence if
> they are able to send you hundreds of attention who shock your display
> in a few lapse of time, I would consider this a security concern...

See my previous message with a revised security consideration.

> And one last point I forgot in my previous message. When it is said:
>> However, since some users might not want this feature to disturb them,
>> a client SHOULD allow the user to disable support. 
> For my own, a better advice is to have it disabled by default (then
> without advertise it at this point) and give the possibility to enable
> this support, not the opposite as proposed here. Many people may install
> a XMPP client without thinking about it and get disturbed when this
> happens the first time, especially if they don't know such feature (I
> heard some stories of people thinking their computer had an issue for
> days, until someone told them it was MSN!). This kind of feature is not
> really "major", hence should be only explicitely enabled (like an extra
> feature when you know what you are doing).

That seems reasonable. How is this text?

"Because some users might not want this feature to disturb them, a
client MUST either (1) allow the user to disable support or (2) disable
the feature by default and process attention requests only if the user
has explicitly enabled support."


More information about the Standards mailing list