-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 399
[WIP] MSC3814: Dehydrated devices with SSSS #3814
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from 23 commits
80243a4
ed2c5eb
703281e
0a149c5
a4e87a6
3827bc0
12acd43
f756db3
6223db4
e3c9ac8
7f24f0d
f85c18d
4954c27
087154a
e7c8266
cf5ae99
d751d33
11149e4
1500897
5742c52
a58288a
21a3d67
6be9078
ec17903
9d6d059
75cf622
8f84545
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,390 @@ | ||
# MSC3814: Dehydrated Devices with [SSSS] | ||
|
||
[MSC2697] introduces device | ||
dehydration -- a method for creating a device that can be stored in a user's | ||
account and receive [Megolm] sessions. In this way, if a user has no other | ||
devices logged in, they can rehydrate the device on the next login and retrieve | ||
the [Megolm] sessions. | ||
|
||
However, the approach presented in that MSC has some downsides, making it | ||
tricky to implement in some clients, and presenting some UX difficulties. For | ||
example, it requires that the device rehydration be done before any other API | ||
calls are made (in particular `/sync`), which may conflict with clients that | ||
currently assume that `/sync` can be called immediately after logging in. | ||
|
||
In addition, the user is required to enter a key or passphrase to create a | ||
dehydrated device. In practice, this is usually the same as the [SSSS] | ||
key/passphrase, which means that the user loses the advantage of verifying | ||
their other devices via emoji or QR code: either they will still be required to | ||
enter their [SSSS] key/passphrase (or a separate one for device dehydration), or | ||
else that client will not be able to dehydrate a device. | ||
|
||
This proposal introduces another way to use the dehydrated device that solves | ||
these problems by storing the dehydration key in [SSSS], and by not changing the | ||
client's device ID. Rather than changing its device ID when it rehydrates the | ||
device, it will keep its device ID and upload its own device keys. The client | ||
will separately rehydrate the device, fetch its to-device messages, and decrypt | ||
them to retrieve the Megolm sessions. | ||
|
||
## Proposal | ||
|
||
### Dehydrating a device | ||
|
||
The dehydration process is similar as in [MSC2697]. One important change is that | ||
the dehydrated device, the public device keys, and one-time keys are all | ||
uploaded in the same request. This change should prevent the creation of | ||
dehydrated devices which do not support end-to-end encryption. | ||
|
||
To upload a new dehydrated device, a client will use `PUT /dehydrated_device`. | ||
Each user has at most one dehydrated device; uploading a new dehydrated device | ||
will remove any previously-set dehydrated device. | ||
|
||
The dehydrated device *must* be cross-signed and have a fallback key. | ||
|
||
The client *must* use the public [Curve25519] [identity key] of the device, | ||
encoded as unpadded Base64, as the device ID. | ||
uhoreg marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
||
The `device_keys`, `one_time_keys`, and `fallback_keys` fields use the same | ||
structure as for the [`/keys/upload`] request. | ||
|
||
We add a new optional property to the device keys: `dehydrated`, which is set to | ||
`true` for dehydrated devices. Defaults to `false`. Clients that support | ||
dehydrated devices *must not* encrypt to devices marked as being a dehydrated | ||
device if they are not cross-signed. Clients should also drop any to-device | ||
messages from a device marked as being a dehydrated device, since dehydrated | ||
device should not be sending messages. Clients can use also this flag to for | ||
uhoreg marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. In the case of encrypted messages, we can identify the sending device using the sender key, or MSC4147 device info. 2 questions:
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. cc @dkasak There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
|
||
other purposes, such as: | ||
|
||
- Display dehydrated devices differently from normal devices, to avoid confusing | ||
from users who do not expect to see another device. | ||
- Don't send key forwarding requests to the dehydrated device, since it will | ||
not respond to them. | ||
- Don't send room keys to the dehydrated device if the user has a sufficient | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This does not seem to be a heuristic, that can be implemented (at least for foreign devices). It would mean that the sending device must know, which devices of the receiving user are considered to be active/online. It also seems, that fallback keys already solve this issue (see also |
||
number of other devices, with the assumption that if the user logs in to a | ||
new device, they can get the room keys from one of their other devices and/or | ||
from key backup. This will reduce the chances that the dehydrated device | ||
will run out of one-time keys, and reduce the number of events that the | ||
dehydrated device will need to decrypt. | ||
|
||
`PUT /dehydrated_device` | ||
|
||
```jsonc | ||
{ | ||
"device_id": "dehydrated_device_id", | ||
"device_data": { | ||
"algorithm": "m.dehydration.v2.olm" | ||
uhoreg marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
"other_fields": "other_values" | ||
}, | ||
"initial_device_display_name": "foo bar", // optional | ||
"device_keys": { | ||
uhoreg marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
"user_id": "<user_id>", | ||
"device_id": "<device_id>", | ||
"valid_until_ts": <millisecond_timestamp>, | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This property isn't defined anywhere |
||
"dehydrated": true, | ||
"algorithms": [ | ||
"m.olm.curve25519-aes-sha2", | ||
] | ||
"keys": { | ||
"<algorithm>:<device_id>": "<key_base64>", | ||
}, | ||
"signatures": { | ||
"<user_id>": { | ||
"<algorithm>:<device_id>": "<signature_base64>" | ||
} | ||
} | ||
}, | ||
"fallback_keys": { | ||
"<algorithm>:<device_id>": "<key_base64>", | ||
"signed_<algorithm>:<device_id>": { | ||
"fallback": true, | ||
"key": "<key_base64>", | ||
"signatures": { | ||
"<user_id>": { | ||
"<algorithm>:<device_id>": "<key_base64>" | ||
} | ||
} | ||
} | ||
}, | ||
"one_time_keys": { | ||
"<algorithm>:<key_id>": "<key_base64>" | ||
} | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
|
||
Result: | ||
|
||
```json | ||
{ | ||
"device_id": "dehydrated device's ID" | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
|
||
### Rehydrating a device | ||
|
||
To rehydrate a device, a client first calls `GET /dehydrated_device` to see if | ||
a dehydrated device is available. If a device is available, the server will | ||
respond with the dehydrated device's device ID and the dehydrated device data. | ||
|
||
`GET /dehydrated_device` | ||
|
||
Response: | ||
|
||
```json | ||
{ | ||
"device_id": "dehydrated device's ID", | ||
"device_data": { | ||
"algorithm": "m.dehydration.v2", | ||
"other_fields": "other_values" | ||
} | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
|
||
If no dehydrated device is available, the server responds with an error code of | ||
`M_NOT_FOUND`, HTTP code 404. | ||
|
||
If the client is able to decrypt the data and wants to use the dehydrated | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I wonder if we can say something like: the server is allowed to discard any non- |
||
device, the client retrieves the to-device messages sent to the dehydrated | ||
device by calling `POST /dehydrated_device/{device_id}/events`, where | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Why include a There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I agree that the device ID is redundant. Though since this MSC has been written a new use-case for this endpoint has been found. In the sliding sync world we have split out the fetching of to-device events into a separate sync loop. Namely one of the biggest problems of the existing To-device events are one of those things that are not directly related to the things that a client will want to display in a room or room list, so putting it into a separate sync loop allows the main loop to quickly send updates while to-device moves along in the background. More info here: matrix-org/matrix-rust-sdk#1928 I think that old sync could handle such a split as well, so I would suggest here to rename the endpoint to become There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The reason for the There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This sounds quite racy to me -- how does the server know that one dehydrated device is claimed? How would the client know to make a new one instead of claim the old one? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's OK for multiple clients to rehydrate the same device (unlike in the previous proposal), because it never becomes a real device. So the server can just wait until some client fetches all the events before dropping the device.
Making a new device and rehydrating an old one are two different use cases. Rehydration happens after you log in, and you're setting up encryption and trying to get keys. It only happens once in the device's lifetime. Creating a new dehydrated device would happen after you've already set up your encryption and already attempted to rehydrate a device. |
||
`{device_id}` is the ID of the dehydrated device. Since there may be many | ||
uhoreg marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
messages, the response can be sent in batches: the response must include a | ||
`next_batch` parameter, which can be used in a subsequent call to `POST | ||
/dehydrated_device/{device_id}/events` to obtain the next batch. | ||
|
||
``` | ||
POST /dehydrated_device/{device_id}/events | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Why is this a POST and not a GET like /sync and /messages? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. IIRC, the rationale was because the call has side-effects (deleting the device). There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It's a bit weird that it doesn't follow the pattern of /messages, /events or /sync imo. I'll try implementing it as a GET without the device deletion first and see how that works out, I think. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. A GET endpoint with side-effects seems like a big no-no to me. Everyone expects a GET request to have approximately zero side-effects. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. oh, but we're also proposing removing the side-effects? SGTM in that case There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yup, the current implementation no longer automatically deletes the device on the server side, but relies on the client to delete/create a new device. So we're going to try to make this a GET. |
||
{ | ||
"next_batch": "token from previous call" // (optional) | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
|
||
Response: | ||
|
||
```jsonc | ||
{ | ||
"events": [ | ||
// array of to-device messages, in the same format as in | ||
// https://spec.matrix.org/unstable/client-server-api/#extensions-to-sync | ||
], | ||
"next_batch": "token to obtain next events" | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
|
||
Once a client calls `POST /dehydrated_device/{device_id}/events` with a | ||
`next_batch` token, unlike the `/sync` endpoint, the server should *not* delete | ||
any to-device messages delivered in previous batches. This should prevent the | ||
loss of messages in case the device performing the rehydration gets deleted. In | ||
the case the rehydration process gets aborted, another device will be able to | ||
restart the process. | ||
|
||
For the last batch of messages, the server will still send a | ||
`next_batch` token, and return an empty `events` array when called with that | ||
Comment on lines
+193
to
+194
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This is not what https://spec.matrix.org/v1.9/appendices/#pagination says should happen. I'd like to see this changed before this stabilises. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The original reason why this endpoint used an empty There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Differences:
|
||
token, this signals to the client that it has received all to-device events and | ||
it can delete the dehydrated device and create a new one. | ||
|
||
If the given `device_id` is not the dehydrated device ID, the server responds | ||
with an error code of `M_FORBIDDEN`, HTTP code 403. | ||
|
||
### Deleting a dehydrated device | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. We should probably specify what happens when we use There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The new endpoint doesn't require UI Auth, whereas |
||
|
||
A dehydrated device will get replaced whenever a new device gets uploaded using | ||
the `PUT /dehydrated_device`, this makes a `DELETE /dehydrated_device` | ||
unnecessary, though for completeness sake and to give client authors to get back | ||
to a state where no dehydrated device exists for a given user we will introduce | ||
one. | ||
|
||
`DELETE /dehydrated_device` | ||
|
||
Response: | ||
|
||
```json | ||
{ | ||
"device_id": "dehydrated device's ID" | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
|
||
### Device Dehydration Format | ||
|
||
We define the following format for storing the dehydrated device (based on the | ||
libolm pickle format): | ||
|
||
We store the device as a concatenation of binary values. Multi-byte numbers are | ||
stored in big-endian format. The version is set to 0x80000000. (Setting the | ||
high bit to 1 is to avoid confusion with the libolm pickle format for accounts, | ||
which was used in a previous version of this MSC.) | ||
|
||
```text | ||
┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ | ||
│ Pickle │ | ||
├───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤ | ||
│Name │ Type │ Size (bytes) │ | ||
├────────────────────────┼───────────────┼──────────────────┤ | ||
│Version │ u32 │ 4 │ | ||
│Curve25519 private key │ [u8; 32] │ 32 │ | ||
│Ed25519 private key │ [u8; 32] │ 32 │ | ||
│Number of one-time keys │ u32 │ 4 │ | ||
│One-time keys │ [OneTimeKey] │ N * 32 │ | ||
│Fallback key │ OptFallback │ 1 or 33 │ | ||
└────────────────────────┴───────────────┴──────────────────┘ | ||
|
||
┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ | ||
│ OneTimeKey │ | ||
├────────────────────────┬───────────────┬──────────────────┤ | ||
│Name │ Type │ Size (bytes) │ | ||
├────────────────────────┼───────────────┼──────────────────┤ | ||
│Curve25519 private key │ [u8; 32] │ 32 │ | ||
└────────────────────────┴───────────────┴──────────────────┘ | ||
|
||
┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ | ||
│ OptFallback │ | ||
├────────────────────────┬───────────────┬──────────────────┤ | ||
│Name │ Type │ Size (bytes) │ | ||
├────────────────────────┼───────────────┼──────────────────┤ | ||
│Fallback present │ boolean │ 1 │ | ||
│Fallback private key │ [u8; 32] │ 0 or 32 │ | ||
└────────────────────────┴───────────────┴──────────────────┘ | ||
``` | ||
|
||
The data is then encrypted and encoded as follows. | ||
|
||
#### Encryption key | ||
|
||
The encryption key used for the dehydrated device will be randomly generated | ||
and stored/shared via SSSS using the name `m.dehydrated_device`. | ||
uhoreg marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. if I'm reading the iOS implementation correctly, the key is encoded with unpadded base64 (as is done with the other keys in secret storage) |
||
|
||
A 96-bit (12-byte) nonce is randomly generated; each time a device is | ||
dehydrated, a new nonce must be generated. | ||
|
||
The plain-text is encrypted with ChaCha20-Poly1305 as defined in | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This is a really weired decision. This makes it a lot harder to implement for SDK developers without any benefit, because AES is also considered safe and is way more supported on all platforms. Browser subtle crypto for example does NOT support ChaCha20-Poly1305. So why not re-use an algorithm, that is already used in the Matrix spec like AES-CTR-256 with HMAC-SHA-256? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. There is a brief summary of why the ChaCha algorithms were introduced over AES in the RFC. I think ideally the MSC should motivate its choice explicitly though. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. As I understand it, the advantages mentioned in the RFC (performance, cache-collision timing attacks) are not relevant for this use case. The disadvantages mentioned above, on the other hand, strongly outweigh them in my opinion. |
||
[RFC8439](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8439) using the encryption | ||
key and nonce. | ||
|
||
The ciphertext and nonce are then encoded as [unpadded | ||
Base64](https://spec.matrix.org/v1.12/appendices/#unpadded-base64) and inserted | ||
into the `device_pickle` and `nonce` properties, respectively, of the | ||
`device_data` JSON message. The `algorithm` property is set to `m.dehydration.v2`. | ||
|
||
```json | ||
{ | ||
"device_data": { | ||
"algorithm": "m.dehydration.v2", | ||
"device_pickle": "encrypted dehydrated device" | ||
"nonce": "random nonce" | ||
} | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
|
||
#### Test vectors | ||
|
||
TODO: put a test vector here | ||
|
||
## Potential issues | ||
|
||
The same issues as in | ||
[MSC2697](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/pull/2697) are present for | ||
this proposal. For completeness, they are repeated here: | ||
|
||
### One-time key exhaustion | ||
|
||
The dehydrated device may run out of one-time keys, since it is not backed by | ||
an active client that can replenish them. Once a device has run out of | ||
one-time keys, no new olm sessions can be established with it, which means that | ||
devices that have not already shared megolm keys with the dehydrated device | ||
will not be able to share megolm keys. This issue is not unique to dehydrated | ||
devices; this also occurs when devices are offline for an extended period of | ||
time. | ||
|
||
This may be addressed by using [fallback keys](https://spec.matrix.org/v1.9/client-server-api/#one-time-and-fallback-keys). | ||
|
||
To reduce the chances of one-time key exhaustion, if the user has an active | ||
client, it can periodically replace the dehydrated device with a new dehydrated | ||
device with new one-time keys. If a client does this, then it runs the risk of | ||
losing any megolm keys that were sent to the dehydrated device, but the client | ||
would likely have received those megolm keys itself. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Are we doing this [replacing the dehydrated device periodically] or not? It seems like both have serious downsides. If we do replace it, we have a very racy operation that is certain to cause UTDs in practice. If we don't replace it, then we'll end up with no remaining OTKs at all, and an incredibly long list of to-device messages all of which have to be downloaded and decrypted by any new clients. |
||
|
||
Alternatively, the client could perform a `/sync` for the dehydrated device, | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Does this sill works with v2? can we still sync on the dehydrated device? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. You can't sync as a different device in this proposal. You can fetch the events for that device, but this proposal implicitly deletes the device in that case, which means you can't keep the device alive after that. So imo your only option is to replace it (which is somewhat easy to do, but you might need to authenticate the new signature upload/device?). |
||
dehydrate the olm sessions, and upload new one-time keys. By doing this | ||
instead of overwriting the dehydrated device, the device can receive megolm | ||
keys from more devices. However, this would require additional server-side | ||
changes above what this proposal provides, so this approach is not possible for | ||
the moment. | ||
|
||
### Accumulated to-device messages | ||
|
||
If a dehydrated device is not rehydrated for a long time, then it may | ||
accumulate many to-device messages from other clients sending it Megolm | ||
sessions. This may result in a slower initial sync when the device eventually | ||
does get rehydrated, due to the number of messages that it will retrieve. | ||
Again, this can be addressed by periodically replacing the dehydrated device, | ||
or by performing a `/sync` for the dehydrated device and updating it. | ||
|
||
## Alternatives | ||
|
||
As mentioned above, | ||
[MSC2697](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/pull/2697) tries to solve | ||
the same problem in a similar manner, but has several disadvantages that are | ||
fixed in this proposal. | ||
|
||
Since the device ID is used in URL path parameters, we could use URL-safe base64 | ||
to derive the device ID. However, this would result in the identity key being | ||
represented in two similar-but-different ways (URL-safe base64 in the device ID, | ||
and regular base64 in the device keys structure), which could lead to confusion. | ||
|
||
Rather than keep the name "dehydrated device", we could change the name to | ||
something like "shrivelled sessions", so that the full expansion of this MSC | ||
title would be "Shrivelled Sessions with Secure Secret Storage and Sharing", or | ||
SSSSSS. However, despite the alliterative property, the term "shrivelled | ||
sessions" is less pleasant, and "dehydrated device" is already commonly used to | ||
refer to this feature. | ||
|
||
The alternatives discussed in MSC2697 are also alternatives here. | ||
|
||
|
||
## Security considerations | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This section should contain a discussion of malicious dehydrated devices injected by the server. The MSC in its current form is almost purely focused on the mechanics of creation and rehydration of dehydrated devices. There is very little discussion of how these devices should be treated by message senders. And yet, these are not ordinary devices, as evidenced by the fact that we are proposing special UI/UX for them in the section concerning the The long-term plan is to move to a model where a user's devices must be signed by the user's cryptographic identity in order to be considered valid (see MSC4153) . Given that context, and the fact that dehydrated devices are a completely new feature, I strongly recommend that this MSC should require that a dehydrated device MUST be signed by a pinned (TOFU-trusted) user identity in order to be considered valid. If the dehydrated device is not signed, or is signed by a user identity which is not the one that is currently pinned by the client, the dehydrated device MUST be ignored by senders as if it it does no exist. That is, clients MUST NOT send any to-device messages to such a device nor accept any to-device messages from it. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Dehydrated devices shouldn't be sending to-device messages, so it's probably safe to say that we should not accept any to-device messages from any devices marked as dehydrated. |
||
|
||
### Weak SSSS passphrase/key | ||
|
||
A similar security consideration to the one in MSC2697 also applies to this | ||
proposal: if SSSS is encrypted using a weak passphrase or key, an attacker | ||
could access it and rehydrate the device to read the user's encrypted | ||
messages. | ||
|
||
### Display of dehydrated devices | ||
|
||
As mentioned earlier, clients may wish to display dehydrated devices differently | ||
from normal devices by checking the `dehydrated` flag in the device's keys. | ||
Clients must exercise care when doing so, as this may allow a attacker to hide a | ||
malicious device. Clients *must not* encrypt messages to a dehydrated device | ||
that is not cross-signed. Clients should indicate the presence of the | ||
dehydrated device, even if it is not listed along with the normal devices. For | ||
example, a client could hide the dehydrated device from the device list, but | ||
indicate that "The dehydrated device feature is enabled". A user can only have | ||
one dehydrated device available at a time, so if more than one device is marked | ||
as `dehydrated: true`, the client should display them all as normal devices. | ||
Clients can also display a warning in such a situation. | ||
|
||
## Unstable prefix | ||
|
||
While this MSC is in development, the `/dehydrated_device` endpoints will be | ||
reached at `/unstable/org.matrix.msc3814.v1/dehydrated_device`, and the | ||
`/dehydrated_device/{device_id}/events` endpoint will be reached at | ||
`/unstable/org.matrix.msc3814.v1/dehydrated_device/{device_id}/events`. The | ||
dehydration algorithm `m.dehydration.v2` will be called | ||
`org.matrix.msc3814.v2`. The SSSS name for the dehydration key will be | ||
`org.matrix.msc3814` instead of `m.dehydrated_device`. | ||
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Client implementation: https://gitlab.com/famedly/company/frontend/famedlysdk/-/merge_requests/1111 Server implementation: matrix-org/synapse#13581 Both not merged yet and notably missing is the dehydrated device format. |
||
## Dependencies | ||
|
||
None | ||
|
||
[RFC5869]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5869 | ||
[AES-256]: http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips197/fips-197.pdf | ||
[CBC]: http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-38a/sp800-38a.pdf | ||
[PKCS#7]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2315 | ||
[Curve25519]: http://cr.yp.to/ecdh.html | ||
[identity key]: https://gitlab.matrix.org/matrix-org/olm/-/blob/master/docs/olm.md#initial-setup | ||
[Megolm]: https://gitlab.matrix.org/matrix-org/olm/blob/master/docs/megolm.md | ||
[SSSS]: https://spec.matrix.org/v1.7/client-server-api/#storage | ||
[MSC2697]: https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/pull/2697 | ||
[`/keys/upload`]: https://spec.matrix.org/v1.7/client-server-api/#post_matrixclientv3keysupload | ||
[device keys]: https://spec.matrix.org/v1.7/client-server-api/#device-keys | ||
[HMAC-SHA-256]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2104 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
we should maybe write down how we know if the server supports the feature. AIUI the sample impl calls
GET /dehydrated_device
and checks for anM_UNRECOGNISED
error?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this intended to be an optional feature for servers?