MSC4042: Disabled Presence State#4042
Conversation
FSG-Cat
changed the title
turt2live
added
proposal
|
|
||
| Presence should not be security relevant as far as the author is aware. The only exception is the privacy | ||
| discussion. This specific proposal should not have any impact on privacy because of the fact that this proposal | ||
| does not it self change anything in practice. Presence being disabled is not a secret its a well known fact. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Doesn't this weaken the fact that one could mask offline as disabled or vice versa? I think generally for the existing kinds of presence there is deliberate difference in user hands, but this is slightly different.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This MSC is written for a context where disabled is used for a whole homeserver or for users who dont care about sending that message.
Considering that this MSC is intended to be used together with the ability to force presence states into whatever value you like to use in a perfect world the privacy argument becomes much weaker due to that factor too.
Like presence is not perfect in 2026 and it was not in 2023. This MSC is essentially just one of the parts of a greater presence redesign that Cat actually came to write a proposal for even if its imperfect.
Edit: And i should say that the whole text about that its no secret is more refering to that in practice its trivial to discover that presence is not enabled for a given matrix homeserver or atleast it was in 2023.
Co-authored-by: Hubert Chathi <hubert@uhoreg.ca>
4 participants
Rendered
This simple MSC adds a new presence state to indicate if no data exists. Usually because presence is disabled.
Signed-off-by: Catalan Lover catalanlover@protonmail.com