XEP-0045 combining valid and invalid ban list modification in one request
Hello! XEP-0045 Section 9.1 defines that: - a user cannot be banned by an admin with a lower affiliation. - if an admin or owner attempts to ban himself, the service MUST deny the request. Section 9.2, that deals with modifying the ban list of a room (potentially applying changes that affect more than one participant) does not mention these cases. It stands to reason that similar definitions must apply. To me, this raises the question of dealing with ban list modification requests that contain both 'valid' as well as 'invalid' modifications. I do not believe that the XEP clearly specifies how to deal with these. I would think that the entire request is to be rejected (as opposed to only the 'valid' modifications' be applied). Can we add this explicitly in the XEP? Kind regards, Guus
Hallo Guus, On 7/5/24 8:49 AM, Guus der Kinderen wrote:
Hello!
XEP-0045 Section 9.1 defines that: - a user cannot be banned by an admin with a lower affiliation. - if an admin or owner attempts to ban himself, the service MUST deny the request.
Section 9.2, that deals with modifying the ban list of a room (potentially applying changes that affect more than one participant) does not mention these cases. It stands to reason that similar definitions must apply.
Yes, I think Section 9.2 should at least refer back to the rules already defined in Section 9.1.
To me, this raises the question of dealing with ban list modification requests that contain both 'valid' as well as 'invalid' modifications. I do not believe that the XEP clearly specifies how to deal with these. I would think that the entire request is to be rejected (as opposed to only the 'valid' modifications' be applied). Can we add this explicitly in the XEP?
Because I believe there is no easy way to communicate to the sender which parts of the modification request are valid and which are invalid, I suggest that none of the requested changes should be applied until the request is corrected. Peter
Thanks Peter, That seems like a sensible change. I have prepared a corresponding modification of the XEP here: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1359 Kind regards, Guus On Mon, Jul 8, 2024 at 7:05 PM Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> wrote:
Hallo Guus,
On 7/5/24 8:49 AM, Guus der Kinderen wrote:
Hello!
XEP-0045 Section 9.1 defines that: - a user cannot be banned by an admin with a lower affiliation. - if an admin or owner attempts to ban himself, the service MUST deny the request.
Section 9.2, that deals with modifying the ban list of a room (potentially applying changes that affect more than one participant) does not mention these cases. It stands to reason that similar definitions must apply.
Yes, I think Section 9.2 should at least refer back to the rules already defined in Section 9.1.
To me, this raises the question of dealing with ban list modification requests that contain both 'valid' as well as 'invalid' modifications. I do not believe that the XEP clearly specifies how to deal with these. I would think that the entire request is to be rejected (as opposed to only the 'valid' modifications' be applied). Can we add this explicitly in the XEP?
Because I believe there is no easy way to communicate to the sender which parts of the modification request are valid and which are invalid, I suggest that none of the requested changes should be applied until the request is corrected.
Peter
participants (2)
-
Guus der Kinderen -
Peter Saint-Andre