[Standards] Question about MUC invites

Bruce Campbell b+jabber at bruce-2007.zerlargal.org
Tue May 15 17:32:11 UTC 2007


On Tue, 15 May 2007, Rachel Blackman wrote:

> On May 15, 2007, at 8:29 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> I don't understand why a bare JID is needed here, a full JID would be 
>>> better.
>> 
>> We probably thought it would be a presence leak. If you are not in my 
>> roster, the room is semi-anonymous, and I send you an invitation, then now 
>> you know my full JID.

If you are a participant in a semi-anonymous room, why would the room 
reveal your JID to anyone but a moderator (assuming that the invitee is 
not one) ?

>> I'm not saying I'm opposed to changing it, just thinking through the 
>> reasoning.
>
> To play devil's advocate here... arguably, if we're not in each other's 
> rosters, and I desperately want to conceal my presence data from you, I have
> no business inviting you to a MUC room in the first place.  Doing so reveals 
> I'm online, which is in my experience the main 'presence leak' people want to 
> avoid. ;)

But its an intentional leak on the part of the invitor that doesn't 
persist once the invitor has left the MUC room.  I'm not sure that it 
counts as an ongoing presence leak.

-- 
   Bruce Campbell.



More information about the Standards mailing list