[Standards] Invisible Command and probes

Matthew Wild mwild1 at gmail.com
Wed Jun 30 18:45:06 UTC 2010


On 30 June 2010 19:29, Philipp Hancke <fippo at goodadvice.pages.de> wrote:
> Matthew Wild wrote:
> [...]
>>
>> This is the problem. It has frequently been raised that the probes
>> sent by the user's server can be detected by a contact's server (think
>> plugins for easily-extensible XMPP servers...) to signal that the user
>> is invisible. This issue is/was present in even ICQ, and they don't
>> need to handle a federated network.
>
> Is there a standard way the contact's server can notify the user about the
> probe?
>

<presence> :)

Exactly what kind of presence I was still deciding. Oops, I just
slipped out the identify of the hypothetical malicious server
developer :)

Frankly if I don't do it (and as a developer I can't help but write
code and poke holes in other peoples' code) someone else will anyway.

>>
>> Some people prefer "true" invisibility (no probes) and are willing to
>> sacrifice immediate presence (they want to exchange messages with a
>> known JID, or they want to join a chatroom). This isn't the same as
>> not sending presence, because if you don't send presence then you
>> aren't eligible to receive stanzas sent to the bare JID.
>
> So we need to decouple initial presence and the ability to receive stanzas
> sent to the bare jid?
>

XEP-0186 already does that, essentially.

Matthew



More information about the Standards mailing list