Robots can now see the entire conversation upon addition, by adding a
context="children" to the "WAVELET_SELF_ADDED event in
capabilities.xml according to cmdskp. I've not tested it, but from the
feedback it appears to work intermittently this is probably because
the whole child-parent thing and context thing are both in early beta
and subject to change without notice, meaning that we're trying to
shoot a moving target, as cmdskp said.

On Nov 24, 12:03 pm, David Nesting <da...@fastolfe.net> wrote:
> This sounds easily achievable with a robot.  For each event, the robot
> checks to see if the edit is authorized, and if not, reverts it to the last
> known authorized edit.  The caveats:
>
> 1. Depending on which blips you want to lock, the robot may need to be added
> prior to an authorized edit, for it to see the content (since all of the
> blips in a wave aren't normally sent with events).
> 2. You'll effectively need to store your own copy of the content of all of
> the blips locked in this manner.  The storage burden may be significant.
> 3. Wave has no functionality to authenticate events[1], so it would be
> possible for someone to forge an event to your robot containing a fake
> "authorized" edit to a blip (or an unlock command), causing your robot to
> accept the edit.  It also allows someone to read blips in a wave they don't
> have permission to see, assuming they could get their hands on the wave ID,
> by submitting a bogus edit event to that blip and watching what your robot
> reverts its content to.
>
> David
>
> [1]http://code.google.com/p/google-wave-resources/issues/detail?id=344
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 8:18 AM, Akiva <akiva.m.co...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I know Wave does not allow users to lock the text of their original
> > blips.  Could someone build a robot that would, when enabled, watch
> > the text of particular blips for edits and restore the original text
> > if edits are made?  This is of particular interest to me because I'm
> > considering opening a number of public waves on political issues, and
> > that's exactly the sort of contentious public debate where bad actors
> > would be likely to alter an author's post in order to discredit them.
>
> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Google Wave API" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to google-wave-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > google-wave-api+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-wave-api%2Bunsubscribe@ 
> > googlegroups.com>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/google-wave-api?hl=en.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Wave API" group.
To post to this group, send email to google-wave-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-wave-api+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-wave-api?hl=en.


Reply via email to