|
|
|
|
|
by kobayashi
3443 days ago
|
|
>there is no protection To my understanding, that's simply not true. What you can accurately say is that with key change notifications turned on, any one* message could be exposed without any means of recourse, but subsequent exposures would require user error. *Question for anyone: could this apply to a "batch" of messages? That is, could servers hold back the delivery of some number of messages and then the attack could be applied to all such undelivered messages? But once the attack took place, the double check would be displayed on the sender's phone and the notification of key change would appear. My understanding is that the answer to the question is 'Yes'. |
|
The responses by Bob are presumably numbered, and some might be delivery receipts, or contain delivery receipts (e.g. A cumulative ACK as in TCP). Could the server selectively suppress the read receipts, or manipulate the cumulative ACK? If it simultaneously triggered rekeying on Bob's side, presumably yes. But not seen a definitive statement on that.