| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
This is an inconsequential change for actual clients, since "resume from the beginning" was never a preferred mode of operation, and it simplifies some internals. It should also mean we get better query plans where `coalesce(cond, true)` was previously being used.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
The protocol here re-checks the caller's password, as a "I left myself logged in" anti-pranking check.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Thankfully, channel creation only happens in one place, so we don't need a state machine for this.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
There's no good reason to use an empty string as your login name, or to use one so long as to annoy others. Names beginning or ending with whitespace, or containing runs of whitespace, are also a technical problem, so they're also prohibited.
This change does not implement [UTS #39], as I haven't yet fully understood how to do so.
[UTS #39]: https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr39/
|
| |
|
|
| |
return the ID of the affected entity.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Canonicalization does two things:
* It prevents duplicate names that differ only by case or only by normalization/encoding sequence; and
* It makes certain name-based comparisons "case-insensitive" (generalizing via Unicode's case-folding rules).
This change is complicated, as it means that every name now needs to be stored in two forms. Unfortunately, this is _very likely_ a breaking schema change. The migrations in this commit perform a best-effort attempt to canonicalize existing channel or login names, but it's likely any existing channels or logins with non-ASCII characters will not be canonicalize correctly. Since clients look at all channel names and all login names on boot, and since the code in this commit verifies canonicalization when reading from the database, this will effectively make the server un-usuable until any incorrectly-canonicalized values are either manually canonicalized, or removed
It might be possible to do better with [the `icu` sqlite3 extension][icu], but (a) I'm not convinced of that and (b) this commit is already huge; adding database extension support would make it far larger.
[icu]: https://sqlite.org/src/dir/ext/icu
For some references on why it's worth storing usernames this way, see <https://www.b-list.org/weblog/2018/nov/26/case/> and the refernced talk, as well as <https://www.b-list.org/weblog/2018/feb/11/usernames/>. Bennett's treatment of this issue is, to my eye, much more readable than the referenced Unicode technical reports, and I'm inclined to trust his opinion given that he maintains a widely-used, internet-facing user registration library for Django.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This normalizes the following values:
* login names
* passwords
* channel names
* message bodies, because why not
The goal here is to have a canonical representation of these values, so that, for example, the service does not inadvertently host two channels whose names are semantically identical but differ in the specifics of how diacritics are encoded, or two users whose names are identical.
Normalization is done on input from the wire, using Serde hooks, and when reading from the database. The `crate::nfc::String` type implements these normalizations (as well as normalizing whenever converted from a `std::string::String` generally).
This change does not cover:
* Trying to cope with passwords that were created as non-normalized strings, which are now non-verifiable as all the paths to verify passwords normalize the input.
* Trying to ensure that non-normalized data in the database compares reasonably to normalized data. Fortunately, we don't _do_ very many string comparisons (I think only login names), so this isn't a huge deal at this stage. Login names will probably have to Get Fixed later on, when we figure out how to handle case folding for login name verification.
|
| |
|
|
| |
messages.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
In general:
* If the client can only assume the response is immediately valid (mostly, login creation, where the client cannot monitor the event stream), then 200 Okay, with data describing the server's view of the request.
* If the client can monitor for completion by watching the event stream, then 202 Accepted, with data describing the server's view of the request.
This comes on the heels of a comment I made on Discord:
> hrm
>
> creating a login: 204 No Content, no body
> sending a message: 202 Accepted, no body
> creating a channel: 200 Okay, has a body
>
> past me, what were you on
There wasn't any principled reason for this inconsistency; it happened as the endpoints were written at different times and with different states of mind.
|
| |\ |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
events in the docs.
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Previously, when a channel (message) was deleted, `hi` would send events to all _connected_ clients to inform them of the deletion, then delete all memory of the channel (message). Any disconnected client, on reconnecting, would not receive the deletion event, and would de-synch with the service. The creation events were also immediately retconned out of the event stream, as well.
With this change, `hi` keeps a record of deleted channels (messages). When replaying events, these records are used to replay the deletion event. After 7 days, the retained data is deleted, both to keep storage under control and to conform to users' expectations that deleted means gone.
To match users' likely intuitions about what deletion does, deleting a channel (message) _does_ immediately delete some of its associated data. Channels' names are blanked, and messages' bodies are also blanked. When the event stream is replayed, the original channel.created (message.sent) event is "tombstoned", with an additional `deleted_at` field to inform clients. The included client does not use this field, at least yet.
The migration is, once again, screamingingly complicated due to sqlite's limited ALTER TABLE … ALTER COLUMN support.
This change also contains capabilities that would allow the API to return 410 Gone for deleted channels or messages, instead of 404. I did experiment with this, but it's tricky to do pervasively, especially since most app-level interfaces return an `Option<Channel>` or `Option<Message>`. Redesigning these to return either `Ok(Channel)` (`Ok(Message)`) or `Err(Error::NotFound)` or `Err(Error::Deleted)` is more work than I wanted to take on for this change, and the utility of 410 Gone responses is not obvious to me. We have other, more pressing API design warts to address.
|
| |/
|
|
|
|
| |
This is mostly a how-to-Svelte thing.
I've also made the API responses for invites a bit more caller-friendly by flattening them and adding the ID field into them. The ID is redundant (the client knows it because the client has the invitation URL), but it makes presenting invitations and actioning them a bit easier.
|
|
|
Having the whole API in a single file was starting to feel very cramped and constraining. This rewrite breaks it out into sections; as a side effect, the docs are now about 2.5x as long as they were, as the rewrite allows more space for each idea without crowding the page.
The docs are best read by running `tools/docs-api`.
|
