Closed claucece closed 3 years ago
@olabini @DrWhax thoughts?
After talking about this, we decided to have:
We should discuss the 'timer' functionality in person.. want to do that next week @olabini ?
Both 1 and 2 are good to have - and #194 is now opened to discuss timers, so all good.
This was covered by #194, and the other ideas don't seem to apply anymore.
There is some functionality in libotr that we might want to have:
There is a callback that is made immediately before a message is encrypted and immediately after a message is decrypted. This callback can tweak the plaintext message as needed. For example, this could allow an application to convert formatting on a message if this would normally be done on the plaintext by some other entity while the message is in transit.
Do we think is useful?
Libotr has:
/* Return a string that will be prefixed to any resent message. If this
These operations give the option of chosing an alternative to the English string "[resent]", when a message is resent.
Libotr has:
In order to prevent a forward secrecy violation, applications using libotr now need to be able to call otrl_message_poll on occasion. The simplest thing to do is just to set up a local timer that calls that function every definterval = otrl_message_poll_get_default_interval(userstate) seconds. To avoid unnecessary overhead, however, the timer_control callback is available. If you set timer_control to non-NULL, it will be called with instructions to turn on or off the periodic timer, and to what interval.
We have something similar with the session expiration.. should we revisit its design?
An application that wants to begin asynchronous key generation calls the following method in libotr:
A background thread can call the following method with the structure that was passed into "newkeyp" above:
Upon completion the application would call:
If the privkey generation was cancelled, the application should call:
should we have something like this?