-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 79
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
Old contact requests result in empty chat messages #9424
Comments
Another thing I've noticed, those old contact requests (even the one that was accepted, is still rendered in the activity center and can still be interacted with. For example, I can click "accept" on an old request. It will result in the following logs:
I do not know how communities are related to that at all. |
We are missing the correct messageType mapping: --- ui/imports/utils/Constants.qml
+++ ui/imports/utils/Constants.qml
@@ -398,6 +398,7 @@ QtObject {
readonly property int gapType: 10
readonly property int editType: 11
readonly property int discordMessageType: 12
+ readonly property int contactIdentityVerification: 13
} and |
Thanks for confirming my hypothesis! |
@MishkaRogachev any idea? :) |
Unfortunately, i did not touch contact requests for a long time, but it can be tails of the current CR refactoring from mobile team. Ill take a closer look a bit later |
Hi there! Can I ask you guys something here?
Q: Are there any plans to change this behavior by limiting the possible number of sent requests to one? TL;DR Why this worries me:
These are not urgent questions. It's just that we are close to the first release cut, so we are already thinking about such things :) |
@qoqobolo so I think the way it is done by Desktop atm, is that, when you have a pending request, you can cancel it and send a new one. The receiver will then get multiple requests. Senders will also not get notified when a request was rejected AFAIK. I'm aware that this is a potential spam vector, but I think we went for it either way.
I'm not sure if this is actually the case right now. Whether or not a sender cancels a request is not something that the receiver will get notified about.
I think this is an important point. @MishkaRogachev do you know from the top of your head what's the implementation parity between mobile and desktop for these cases? |
@0x-r4bbit hmm wait, in what way exactly did you send those three requests on your screenshot? :)
I mean yes, you can cancel it in settings, but there is another more fast way to send a new one: you just remove the chat key and paste it again without canceling. This doesn't look right to me, because this is what makes it so easy to quickly send a large number of requests. Screen.Recording.2023-02-06.at.16.02.38.movSo in terms of spam, I just wanted to bring your attention and make sure you're aware of this way to send multiple contact requests. Let me know if it's better to forward this to the QA team for further discussion on whether this is correct, logging an issue, etc, I don't mean to shower you with these questions if you are not working specifically on this functionality :) In terms of parity between mobile and desktop, I will also ask Andrea what is the desirable behavior from our side in this case. |
That's exactly how I've done it. |
Closing this as we can no longer send multiple contact requests, so the original issue can't be reproduced. Also, there have a been a lot of fixes to the displaying of the contact request messages in chat |
Okay so here's a funny scenario:
This is most likely because a contact request comes as a message signal and is probably interpreted as a chat message as well.
Then, desktop probably doesn't render render the requests textmessage. I assume it doesn't do that because the contenttype of the message isn't "text" but "unknown".
This needs to be checked, I'm just thinking out loud here.
Either way, I think we should not render previous contact request messages as chat message in the first place.
Here's a screenshot from A's perspective after accepting the request:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: