Document missing parts of E2E #1284

Zil0 · 2018-06-07T17:50:59Z

This is a step towards fixing #501, by merging what has already be written long ago by @richvdh in https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/tree/drafts/e2e.
Since this branch has long diverged, I had to resort to copy-pasting...

Opening this because I think I will need feedback as I go. Please do not merge until I remove the WIP tag. I think it will need squashing at some point anyway.

Signed-off-by: Valentin Deniaud <valentin.deniaud@inpt.fr>

Zil0 · 2018-06-11T14:12:52Z

Some specific questions:

9973445 is this correct? if yes, is it clear?
e83a955 does this need more detail? Is it the last thing that was missing from the olm section?

Zil0 · 2018-07-18T07:34:57Z

event-schemas/schema/m.room.encrypted

@@ -1,9 +1,3 @@
---
-allOf:


I suppose this is not a good solution according to the comment below? But I can't really see why.

Zil0 · 2018-07-18T07:48:10Z

specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst

   }

 The type and content of the plaintext message event are given in the payload.

 We include the room ID in the payload, because otherwise the homeserver would
 be able to change the room a message was sent in.

-.. TODO: claimed_keys
-
 Clients must confirm that the ``sender_key`` belongs to the user that sent the


I didn't want to change the beginning of the sentence, but I don't think it is very clear since it feels weird to say "clients must do something they maybe can't".
How about starting the sentence with "When a device is verified, clients must confirm..."?

One way to deal with this would be to separate key verification from verifying that it matches result /keys/query. So you could say something like "Clients must confirm that the sender_key matches the keys returned by /keys/query for the given user. This can be done by ..."

How about:

Clients must confirm that the sender_key and the ed25519 field value under the keys property matches the keys returned by /keys/query for the given user, and verify the signature of the payload. Without this check, a client cannot be sure that the sender device owns the private part of the ed25519 key it claims to have in the Olm payload.
This is crucial when the ed25519 key corresponds to a verified device.

I would change "and verify" to "and must also verify" since the first sentence is a bit long, and the "must also" will link it with the "Clients must" at the beginning of the sentence. But other than that, it sounds good.

Zil0 · 2018-07-18T07:53:19Z

event-schemas/schema/m.room.encrypted

+          present.
+      ciphertext:
+        type:
+          - object


I'll need swagger/yaml advice here. This results in the Type column saying object or string, when I want it to say CiphertextInfo or string, documenting the CiphertextInfo object as I would do with

type: object title: CiphertextInfo properties: ciphertext: ...

How can I do this?

Could try putting title at the same level as type:

type: - object - string title: CiphertextInfo

Otherwise I think you'll also need to specify the properties.

@Zil0, this is not quite about Swagger, rather about JSON Schema which Swagger uses to define object schemas. You need oneOf: https://spacetelescope.github.io/understanding-json-schema/reference/combining.html

Thank you both for your input.

@turt2live when doing this, CiphertextInfo is simply ignored.

@KitsuneRal it fails with Error reading property None.ciphertext: 'type' in scripts/templating/matrix_templates/units.py:280 when I do:

ciphertext: description: |- Normally required. The encrypted content of the event. oneOf: - type: string - type: object title: CiphertextInfo properties: sender_key: type: string

type seems like a required key. If I put object as a wild guess, oneOf is ignored.

For the record the first thing I tried fails with mapping values are not allowed here which is thrown by yaml:

ciphertext: description: |- Normally required. The encrypted content of the event. type: - string - object title: CiphertextInfo properties: sender_key: type: string

My first thought was the same as yours except that you can't miss strings and mapping pairs, so it should have been type: object instead of just object. Given that it's type inside type I'm unsure of that works either. As for the case with oneOf, you may try to wrap it in another type - I believe chances should be better then.

I'm not sure but that might work: https://github.com/QMatrixClient/matrix-doc/tree/support_oneOf

Thanks for looking into this! Sadly it doesn't build master for me (I cloned your fork).
local variable 'prop_title' referenced before assignment, and other errors after adding back the else:. I don't feel like debugging this right now :/

Sorry for throwing dysfunctional code at you. I've fixed this and a couple of other errors, gendoc.py should work fine now (just pull the latest changes from the same branch of mine).

There's a formal problem with this, however: turned out that Swagger/OpenAPI 2 only uses allOf from JSON Schema but not oneOf. OpenAPI 3 fixes this, adding oneOf, anyOf etc. to the list of borrowings from JSON Schema. So basically the options are:

Assume and document an "extension" to OpenAPI 2 (similar to Clarification on third party fields #1414)

Wait until we switch to OpenAPI 3 (watch [WIP] Upgrade to OpenAPI/Swagger 3.0 #1446) - this will require all the scripts to be upgraded anyway to support its new features.

Stay with the limited [ object, string ] syntax (it's not the first such case, by the way - I see something similar in client-server/definitions/push_rule.yaml).

Given that it's a pure formality, I'd probably recommend option 1.

Thanks! It works great. Option 1 seems good, will you open a separate PR? I'll rebase this one on your branch for now.

I will, and I guess it's a good idea to rebase your branch on mine (now that mine is rebased on master).

Zil0 · 2018-07-18T08:06:58Z

event-schemas/schema/m.room.encryption

+        type: string
+        description: |-
+          The encryption algorithm to be used to encrypt messages sent in this
+          room. For example, ``m.megolm.v1.aes-sha2``.


I have a very general question that applies to other parts too: what is the rule of thumb here for saying "For example"?
The way I see it, there is no other supported encryption protocol. If a client implements one, it would be a spec extension, hence not covered by the spec. Another way of putting this is, if a client implements, say rot13 as an encryption algorithm to be used in rooms, it would conform to the spec, while having a non-working end-to-end encryption behavior in the Matrix world; isn't that a problem?
As a result of those thoughts I would have put at least "Should be" instead of "For example", had it not be written before.
Note that the guide clearly states that only Megolm is supported as a value here https://matrix.org/docs/guides/e2e_implementation.html#id32

This is usually done by using the enum property, which is just an array of allowed values. You can see an example of it at https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/master/api/client-server/receipts.yaml#L52, or you can find other examples by just grepping for "enum".

Yup, totally what I was looking for, thanks.

Zil0 · 2018-07-18T08:11:19Z

I'm mostly done with this, modulo eventual omissions and wording issues. With #1420, I think the last missing bit is key sharing, and then #501 can hopefully be closed?

Please answer the questions I left as review comments (even the ones marked Outdated by GitHub).

Fix #589, ~~#590~~ (see here), #1200, #1171, #1157. Partially fix #1212, as it does not include the S2S part.

Zil0 · 2018-07-29T15:37:34Z

event-schemas/schema/m.room.encrypted

+                  type: integer
+                  description: The Olm message type.
+        description: |-
+          Normally required. The encrypted content of the event. Either directly


Why "normally"?

good question.The spec now says "Required. Normally required."

Let's get rid of "Normally required."

Zil0 · 2018-07-31T14:46:44Z

event-schemas/examples/m.room.encrypted#olm

+    "ciphertext": {
+      "7qZcfnBmbEGzxxaWfBjElJuvn7BZx+lSz/SvFrDF/z8": {
+        "type": 0,
+        "body": "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"


We probably don't want to keep those super-long strings, right?

Yeah, for examples, keep it short.

uhoreg

Looks pretty good so far, as far as I can tell. My suggestions are mostly minor wording changes.

uhoreg · 2018-08-15T20:05:37Z

event-schemas/schema/m.room.encrypted

+      session_id:
+        type: string
+        description: |-
+          The ID of the session used to encrypt the message. Only present with


Maybe say "Required with Megolm" rather than "Only present with Megolm"?

uhoreg · 2018-08-15T20:08:35Z

event-schemas/schema/m.room_key

+      algorithm:
+        type: string
+        description: |-
+          The encryption algorithm the key in this event is to be used with.


add enum: ["m.megolm.v1.aes-sha2"]

uhoreg · 2018-08-15T20:09:42Z

event-schemas/schema/m.room_key

+
+description: |-
+  This event type is used to exchange keys for end-to-end encryption. Typically
+  it is encrypted as an ``m.room.encrypted`` event.


Also mention that they're typically sent as to-device events.

uhoreg · 2018-08-15T20:11:37Z

event-schemas/schema/m.room_key

+        description: The room where the key is used.
+      session_id:
+        type: string
+        description: The ID of the session holding the key.


"The ID of the session that the key is for."?

uhoreg · 2018-08-15T20:49:56Z

specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst

+Messaging algorithm names use the extensible naming scheme used throughout this
+specification. Algorithm names that start with ``m.`` are reserved for
+algorithms defined by this specification. Implementations wanting to experiment
+with new algorithms are encouraged to pick algorithm names that start with


I'd say "Implementations wanting to experiment with new algorithms must be uniquely globally namespaced following Java's package naming conventions." (with the wording copied from https://matrix.org/docs/spec/#events)

uhoreg · 2018-08-15T22:49:41Z

event-schemas/schema/m.room.encrypted

+                  description: The Olm message type.
+        description: |-
+          Normally required. The encrypted content of the event. Either directly
+          the encrypted payload in the case of a Megolm event, or a map from the


Maybe replace the last sentence with a pointer to the "Messaging Algorithms" section, because I think it needs more than what fits in the description. Perhaps "For more details, see ..."

Appended rather than replaced, since this last part was used to explain the Type column.

"directly" doesn't really make sense here. You could say "Either the encrypted payload itself, in the case of...", or just get rid of "directly".

uhoreg · 2018-08-15T23:54:33Z

specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst

+.. Note::
+
+  When Bob and Alice share a room, with Bob tracking Alice's devices, she may leave
+  the room and then add a new device. Bob expects to be notified of this change, but


I'm not sure that "Bob expects to be notified" is accurate or necessary. I'd just say "Bob will not be notified of thes change as he doesn't share a room anymore with Alice."

uhoreg · 2018-08-15T23:57:22Z

specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst

+  room again, Bob has an out-of-date list of Alice's devices. In order to address
+  this issue, Bob's homeserver will add Alice's user ID to the ``changed`` property of
+  the ``device_lists`` field, thus Bob will update his list of Alice's devices as part
+  of its normal processing. Note that Bob can also be notified when he stops sharing


The "its" in "its normal processing" should probably be changed to "his" as it refers to Bob.

uhoreg · 2018-08-16T00:05:43Z

specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst

 ========= ========= =============================================

+.. NOTE::
+
+  A user is added to ``changed`` everytime they join a room where the client is.


"every time" should be two words, and maybe add ", and vice versa" to the end of this sentence. I don't really understand this paragraph, though.

The explanation for this paragraph is here https://matrix.to/#/!uewiilduiDRfPomIha:matrix.org/$153201826312709avXKR:matrix.org.

OK, I see. It's a bit unclear the way it's worded right now, but it's a bit tricky to word correctly. Maybe something like: "For optimal performance, Alice should be added to changed in Bob's sync only when she adds a new device, or when Alice and Bob now share a room but didn't share any room previously. However, for the sake of simpler logic, a server may add Alice to changed when Alice and Bob share a new room, even if they previously already shared a room."

uhoreg · 2018-08-16T00:22:15Z

specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst

@@ -266,9 +508,18 @@ device_lists DeviceLists Optional. Information on e2e device updates. Note:
 Parameter Type      Description
 ========= ========= =============================================
 changed   [string]  List of users who have updated their device identity keys
-                    since the previous sync response.
+                    since the previous sync response, or who have just joined


Bob will also be added to Alice's the changed set if Alice joins a new room with Bob, not just if Bob joins a new room with Alice. So I'd change it to: "List of users who have updated their device identity keys, or who now share an encrypted room with the client since the previous sync response."

Right, don't think I ever noticed this :/

uhoreg · 2018-08-16T12:18:29Z

specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst

+
+* Curve25519 for the initial key agreement.
+* HKDF-SHA-256 for ratchet key derivation.
+* Curve25519 for the DH ratchet.


I'm not sure if "DH ratchet" is the right term.

https://signal.org/docs/specifications/doubleratchet/#diffie-hellman-ratchet does describe the root key ratchet as a "Diffie-Hellman ratchet", so I'd say it's a reasonable term.

On the other hand maybe it would be clearer to say "Curve25519 for the root key ratchet" / "HMAC-SHA-256 for the chain key ratchet".

<shrug> I don't suppose it really matters. The point is simply to list the encryption primitives so that if someone finds a vulnerability in SHA-256 tomorrow you can see what's affected.

Zil0 · 2018-08-16T12:24:12Z

Applied your suggestions and cleaned-up commit history.

richvdh

looks awesome! A couple of niggles it would be great to fix if you get a minute

richvdh · 2018-08-16T20:27:29Z

event-schemas/schema/m.room.encrypted

+                  type: integer
+                  description: The Olm message type.
+        description: |-
+          Normally required. The encrypted content of the event. Either directly


good question.The spec now says "Required. Normally required."

Let's get rid of "Normally required."

richvdh · 2018-08-16T20:29:45Z

event-schemas/schema/m.room.encrypted

+                  description: The Olm message type.
+        description: |-
+          Normally required. The encrypted content of the event. Either directly
+          the encrypted payload in the case of a Megolm event, or a map from the


"directly" doesn't really make sense here. You could say "Either the encrypted payload itself, in the case of...", or just get rid of "directly".

richvdh · 2018-08-16T20:30:27Z

event-schemas/schema/m.room.encrypted

+          Normally required. The encrypted content of the event. Either directly
+          the encrypted payload in the case of a Megolm event, or a map from the
+          recipient Curve25519 identity key to ciphertext information in the case
+          of an Olm event. For more details, see `Messaging Algorithm Names`_.


I think you want "Messaging Algorithms" rather than "Messaging Algorithm Names".

richvdh · 2018-08-16T21:47:58Z

event-schemas/examples/m.room.encrypted#megolm

+  "origin_server_ts": 1476648761524,
+  "sender": "@example:localhost",
+  "type": "m.room.encrypted",
+  "unsigned": {


most of the other event examples don't include "unsigned", and I think that's a good pattern to follow, because it will only appear when you use certain APIs to retrieve the event.

richvdh · 2018-08-16T21:57:03Z

specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst

+  Bob). She will not send sensitive material to that device, and cannot trust
+  messages apparently received from it.
+
+* Alice may choose to skip the device verification process. She is not be able


"She is not able"

richvdh · 2018-08-16T22:04:14Z

specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst

+
+* Curve25519 for the initial key agreement.
+* HKDF-SHA-256 for ratchet key derivation.
+* Curve25519 for the DH ratchet.


https://signal.org/docs/specifications/doubleratchet/#diffie-hellman-ratchet does describe the root key ratchet as a "Diffie-Hellman ratchet", so I'd say it's a reasonable term.

On the other hand maybe it would be clearer to say "Curve25519 for the root key ratchet" / "HMAC-SHA-256 for the chain key ratchet".

<shrug> I don't suppose it really matters. The point is simply to list the encryption primitives so that if someone finds a vulnerability in SHA-256 tomorrow you can see what's affected.

richvdh · 2018-08-16T22:05:06Z

specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst

+
+The type and content of the plaintext message event are given in the payload.
+
+We include the room ID in the payload, because otherwise the homeserver would


this is only actually true if we were sending in-room events; if it's a to-device event it's omitted. We should probably say that.

Since we're never sending Olm in-room event, I think it would just be confusing. I'll move the sentence to the Megolm subsection where it should have been in the first place.

richvdh · 2018-08-16T22:09:27Z

specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst

+  A user is added to ``changed`` every time they join a room where the client is,
+  and vice versa. Instead, for optimal performance, ``changed`` could be populated
+  only when a user starts sharing a room with the client on the condition they
+  didn't before. This may be hard to garantee, hence this behavior is not enforced.


guarantee.

And "behaviour", since we prefer British English

I'll change this according to what @uhoreg has written here #1284 (comment).

It didn't correspond to the example response.

fix matrix-org#1157

fix matrix-org#1171

This was written by Richard van der Hoff.

Zil0 · 2018-08-18T09:48:25Z

Rebased on master and made an attempt at newsfragment.

Apparently newsfragments as specified in Towncrier's doc use issue numbers but we are using PR numbers, so issue_format in https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/master/changelogs/client_server/pyproject.toml should probably be changed to /pull/.

turt2live · 2018-08-18T16:52:42Z

Looks like your feature fragment got an rst extension.

A bit of background on why /issues/ was chosen: in the unlikely/rare case we need to reference something by issue then we don't need to go spelunking in the depths of the build process. Github does support an automatic redirect, which is being (ab)used here.

richvdh · 2018-08-20T08:22:51Z

\o/

Zil0 force-pushed the e2e_doc branch from 2bd118a to 8f80e13 Compare June 11, 2018 09:50

Zil0 force-pushed the e2e_doc branch from 7d75dd4 to 068967e Compare July 18, 2018 07:29

Zil0 changed the title ~~[WIP][RFC] Document missing parts of E2E~~ Document missing parts of E2E Jul 18, 2018

Zil0 force-pushed the e2e_doc branch from 068967e to 0785f94 Compare July 18, 2018 07:33

Zil0 commented Jul 18, 2018

View reviewed changes

Zil0 force-pushed the e2e_doc branch from 0785f94 to e088261 Compare July 18, 2018 07:44

Zil0 commented Jul 18, 2018

View reviewed changes

uhoreg self-assigned this Jul 18, 2018

Zil0 force-pushed the e2e_doc branch 2 times, most recently from 1c51cc8 to 465fab5 Compare July 29, 2018 15:36

Zil0 commented Jul 29, 2018

View reviewed changes

Zil0 commented Jul 31, 2018

View reviewed changes

uhoreg mentioned this pull request Jul 31, 2018

Federation API r0 megathread #1464

Closed

35 tasks

Zil0 force-pushed the e2e_doc branch from 8354d4d to 26d97a6 Compare August 1, 2018 08:31

uhoreg mentioned this pull request Aug 6, 2018

Device List Update Stream #1212

Closed

benparsons mentioned this pull request Aug 6, 2018

Configuration of E2E encryption in a room #1200

Closed

Zil0 mentioned this pull request Aug 6, 2018

Update on E2E implementation guide matrix-org/matrix.org#201

Merged

KitsuneRal mentioned this pull request Aug 12, 2018

Support oneOf #1503

Merged

turt2live added this to Needs review in August 2018 r0 Aug 14, 2018

uhoreg reviewed Aug 16, 2018

View reviewed changes

Zil0 force-pushed the e2e_doc branch from ed28080 to dd578d0 Compare August 16, 2018 12:22

richvdh self-requested a review August 16, 2018 12:25

richvdh requested changes Aug 16, 2018

View reviewed changes

Zil0 force-pushed the e2e_doc branch from dd578d0 to e20b289 Compare August 17, 2018 13:24

Zil0 added 21 commits August 18, 2018 11:41

fix /keys/claim request example

8afc82c

It didn't correspond to the example response.

document device_one_time_keys_count in /sync/ response

10c3307

fix matrix-org#1157

document left parameter of device_lists in sync response

a28f243

fix matrix-org#1171

document device verification

8274f91

This was written by Richard van der Hoff.

explain how to verify sender_key ownership

76071ba

add Olm missing properties

669605b

complete Megolm documentation

68b78dc

document E2E events

e5005b2

This was written by Richard van der Hoff.

add missing m.room.encryption properties

3a8d13d

complete m.room_key documentation

c60109d

add required room ids

8732378

Olm m.room.encrypted example

661176c

fix typo

2487866

document changed field behavior in e2e sync extension

4e0f107

remove warning pointing at outdated doc

eb8ea0e

require megolm algorithm in m.room.encryption

6c44233

add missing m.room.encrypted event properties

f853856

enforce unique namespacing in new algorithms experiments

b2316ba

complete Olm documentation

8ba19b5

room ID is included in Megolm plaintext, not Olm

9430f2c

changelog

98e2e8d

Zil0 force-pushed the e2e_doc branch from fa5c861 to 98e2e8d Compare August 18, 2018 09:42

Rename 1284.feature.rst to 1284.feature

206f78c

richvdh merged commit fe3f3b6 into matrix-org:master Aug 20, 2018

August 2018 r0 automation moved this from Reviewer approved to Done (this list will be incomplete) Aug 20, 2018

uhoreg mentioned this pull request Aug 24, 2018

Support for encryption in group chats (SPEC-292) #589

Closed

RiotTranslateBot pushed a commit to RiotTranslateBot/matrix-doc that referenced this pull request Aug 22, 2023

improve documentation of ephemeral events (matrix-org#1284)

2fcc92c


		The type and content of the plaintext message event are given in the payload.

		We include the room ID in the payload, because otherwise the homeserver would

Document missing parts of E2E #1284

Document missing parts of E2E #1284

Conversation

Zil0 commented Jun 7, 2018 • edited Loading

Zil0 commented Jun 11, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Zil0 commented Jul 18, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

uhoreg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Zil0 commented Aug 16, 2018

richvdh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Zil0 commented Aug 18, 2018

turt2live commented Aug 18, 2018

richvdh commented Aug 20, 2018

Zil0 commented Jun 7, 2018 •

edited

Loading

Zil0 commented Jun 11, 2018 •

edited

Loading

Zil0 commented Jul 18, 2018 •

edited

Loading