matrix-org / matrix-org/matrix-spec
Clarify how to handle key sharing wrt history visibility for invites
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- HTML
- Stars
- 330
- Forks
- 150
- Avg merge
- 2h 21m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 3
Description
**Link to problem area**:
https://spec.matrix.org/latest/client-server-api/#end-to-end-encryption
**Issue**
While history key sharing is now specified for history visibility including changes between "shareable" and not invite/join visibilities, the spec is missing clarity that when a user is invited to a room, their devices SHOULD(?) be considered a member of the megolm group from that point onward.
Element introduced this behavior in https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-js-sdk/pull/666.
Having discussed with @richvdh, I will propose a clarification PR for this.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the end-to-end encryption section of the Matrix Client-Server API specification and review the history visibility rules, especially changes between shareable and invite/join visibilities. Compare the specified behavior with matrix-js-sdk pull request #666 and the issue's proposed clarification. Done means the specification clearly states whether invited users' devices are considered part of the Megolm group from invitation onward.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 55/100