Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

replies include a copy of text that some users might not be allowed to see #8645

Closed
uhoreg opened this issue Feb 14, 2019 · 4 comments
Closed
Labels
P2 S-Minor Impairs non-critical functionality or suitable workarounds exist T-Defect X-Spec-Changes

Comments

@uhoreg
Copy link
Member

uhoreg commented Feb 14, 2019

When making a reply, the text of the message replied to is copied in the reply. If a user can read the reply, but is not supposed to see the original message (e.g. due to history settings or due to the user purposely not being sent decryption keys), this leaks the original message to the user who is otherwise unable to read it.

@turt2live
Copy link
Member

Note this is also reported as a spec issue: https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/issues/1654

@lampholder lampholder added T-Defect P2 S-Minor Impairs non-critical functionality or suitable workarounds exist labels Feb 19, 2019
@lampholder
Copy link
Member

The text of the message is copied into the fallback message body; if we didn't do that (and relied on riot/other clients fishing out the message body from the event reference) then we'd be fine.

It's been a while, so I can't remember exactly when we can stop populating the fallback - I expect it's when all clients have/have been given enough warning to implement replies, and when bridges have also been updated to handle replies properly.

@turt2live
Copy link
Member

It's been a while, so I can't remember exactly when we can stop populating the fallback - I expect it's when all clients have/have been given enough warning to implement replies, and when bridges have also been updated to handle replies properly.

Never, as the spec is currently written (nothing stopping us from changing that in the future though).

@t3chguy
Copy link
Member

t3chguy commented Jul 23, 2021

Closing in favour of the spec issue

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
P2 S-Minor Impairs non-critical functionality or suitable workarounds exist T-Defect X-Spec-Changes
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants