I think the problem Philipp is getting at (or at least that I see) is when you block a muc full jid. That's when you won't see a user's presence (not know they are in the room), won't receive their messages but they will receive your messages.
This is independent of the real jid of the participant. On Oct 20, 2017 11:41, "Jonas Wielicki" <jo...@wielicki.name> wrote: > On Freitag, 20. Oktober 2017 11:37:15 CEST Philipp Hörist wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I dont read anything in the XEP about Real JIDs. > > The XEP allows to block MUC Jids perfectly fine like > > > > user@domain/resource > > ex. confere...@gajim.org/testuser > > > > And if i block such a JID, i think the server will block all presence > from > > that. > > I missed that you were blocking participant JIDs. > > > Now i know there is no good way of blocking MUC participants, the best > > thing you can do is a kind of "ignore" functionality with privacy lists. > > > > But i think a note in the XEP is needed that MUC Jids should not be > added, > > and if, that its clear this is only a one way blocking, which can lead to > > privacy leaks. > > Adding a note doesn’t harm. That it blocks presence is unfortunate, I had > my > share of mishaps because I forgot that a person I /ignore-ed was in some > IRC > channel … > > I could imagine a MUC server supporting XEP-0191 directly and allowing you > to > block participants in some sensible way. > > kind regards, > Jonas > _______________________________________________ > Standards mailing list > Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards > Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org > _______________________________________________ > >
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
