Compare commits

...

2 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
codedust 57a1d5ad0e
Clarify terminology for keys in cross-signing module (2nd attempt) (#2306)
Some checks are pending
Spec / 🔎 Validate OpenAPI specifications (push) Waiting to run
Spec / 🔎 Check Event schema examples (push) Waiting to run
Spec / 🔎 Check OpenAPI definitions examples (push) Waiting to run
Spec / 🔎 Check JSON Schemas inline examples (push) Waiting to run
Spec / ⚙️ Calculate baseURL for later jobs (push) Waiting to run
Spec / 🐍 Build OpenAPI definitions (push) Blocked by required conditions
Spec / 📢 Run towncrier for changelog (push) Waiting to run
Spec / 📖 Build the spec (push) Blocked by required conditions
Spec / 🔎 Validate generated HTML (push) Blocked by required conditions
Spec / 📖 Build the historical backup spec (push) Blocked by required conditions
Spec / Create release (push) Blocked by required conditions
Spell Check / Spell Check with Typos (push) Waiting to run
* Clarify terminology for keys in cross-signing module

- the naming of the master signing key has been harmonised (no more 'master
  cross-signing key' or 'master key').
- in the QR code example, the term 'cross-signing key' has been replaced
  by 'master signing key' since in mode 0x00, the current user's own master
  signing key and what the device thinks the other user's master signng key
  is used.
- it has been made more explicit that cross-signing private keys stored on the
  server are stored as described in the secrets module (as opposed to store
  them in unencrypted form)

Signed-off-by: codedust <codedust@so.urceco.de>
Co-authored-by: Richard van der Hoff <1389908+richvdh@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-02-24 14:01:40 +00:00
Tulir Asokan 6b6d351ef8
Specify basic validation for federation membership endpoints (#2284)
Signed-off-by: Tulir Asokan <tulir@maunium.net>
Co-authored-by: Richard van der Hoff <1389908+richvdh@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-02-24 13:35:05 +00:00
16 changed files with 276 additions and 108 deletions

View file

@ -0,0 +1 @@
Clarify terminology for keys in cross-signing module.

View file

@ -0,0 +1 @@
Specify validation for PDUs passed to and returned from federation membership endpoints.

View file

@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ Example:
```
`ed25519` and `curve25519` keys are used for [device keys](#device-keys).
Additionally, `ed25519` keys are used for [cross-signing keys](#cross-signing).
Additionally, `ed25519` keys are used for [cross-signing](#cross-signing).
`signed_curve25519` keys are used for [one-time and fallback keys](#one-time-and-fallback-keys).
@ -675,7 +675,7 @@ The process between Alice and Bob verifying each other would be:
15. Assuming they match, Alice and Bob's devices each calculate Message
Authentication Codes (MACs) for:
* Each of the keys that they wish the other user to verify (usually their
device ed25519 key and their master cross-signing key).
device ed25519 key and their master signing key, see below).
* The complete list of key IDs that they wish the other user to verify.
The MAC calculation is defined [below](#mac-calculation).
@ -931,40 +931,42 @@ and can be translated online:
Rather than requiring Alice to verify each of Bob's devices with each of
her own devices and vice versa, the cross-signing feature allows users
to sign their device keys such that Alice and Bob only need to verify
once. With cross-signing, each user has a set of cross-signing keys that
once. With cross-signing, each user has a set of cross-signing key pairs that
are used to sign their own device keys and other users' keys, and can be
used to trust device keys that were not verified directly.
Each user has three ed25519 key pairs for cross-signing:
Each user has three ed25519 key pairs used for cross-signing (cross-signing keys):
- a master key (MSK) that serves as the user's identity in
cross-signing and signs their other cross-signing keys;
- a master signing key (MSK, for historical reasons sometimes known as
`master_key`) that serves as the user's identity in cross-signing and signs
their user-signing and self-signing keys;
- a user-signing key (USK) -- only visible to the user that it belongs
to --that signs other users' master keys; and
to -- that signs other users' master signing keys; and
- a self-signing key (SSK) that signs the user's own device keys.
The master key may also be used to sign other items such as the backup
key. The master key may also be signed by the user's own device keys to
The master signing key may also be used to sign other items such as the backup
key. The master signing key may also be signed by the user's own device keys to
aid in migrating from device verifications: if Alice's device had
previously verified Bob's device and Bob's device has signed his master
key, then Alice's device can trust Bob's master key, and she can sign it
key, then Alice's device can trust Bob's master signing key, and she can sign it
with her user-signing key.
Users upload their cross-signing keys to the server using [POST
Users upload the public parts of their master signing, user-signing and
self-signing keys to the server using [POST
/\_matrix/client/v3/keys/device\_signing/upload](/client-server-api/#post_matrixclientv3keysdevice_signingupload). When Alice uploads
new cross-signing keys, her user ID will appear in the `changed`
new keys, her user ID will appear in the `changed`
property of the `device_lists` field of the `/sync` of response of all
users who share an encrypted room with her. When Bob sees Alice's user
ID in his `/sync`, he will call [POST /\_matrix/client/v3/keys/query](/client-server-api/#post_matrixclientv3keysquery)
to retrieve Alice's device and cross-signing keys.
to retrieve Alice's device keys, as well as their cross-signing keys.
If Alice has a device and wishes to send an encrypted message to Bob,
she can trust Bob's device if:
- Alice's device is using a master key that has signed her
- Alice's device is using a master signing key that has signed her
user-signing key,
- Alice's user-signing key has signed Bob's master key,
- Bob's master key has signed Bob's self-signing key, and
- Alice's user-signing key has signed Bob's master signing key,
- Bob's master signing key has signed Bob's self-signing key, and
- Bob's self-signing key has signed Bob's device key.
The following diagram illustrates how keys are signed:
@ -1024,27 +1026,28 @@ signatures that she cannot see:
```
[Verification methods](#device-verification) can be used to verify a
user's master key by using the master public key, encoded using unpadded
base64, as the device ID, and treating it as a normal device. For
example, if Alice and Bob verify each other using SAS, Alice's
user's master signing key by treating its public key (master signing public
key), encoded using unpadded base64, as the device ID, and treating it as a
normal device. For example, if Alice and Bob verify each other using SAS,
Alice's
`m.key.verification.mac` message to Bob may include
`"ed25519:alices+master+public+key": "alices+master+public+key"` in the
`mac` property. Servers therefore must ensure that device IDs will not
collide with cross-signing public keys.
The cross-signing private keys can be stored on the server or shared with other
devices using the [Secrets](#secrets) module. When doing so, the master,
user-signing, and self-signing keys are identified using the names
`m.cross_signing.master`, `m.cross_signing.user_signing`, and
Using the [Secrets](#secrets) module the private parts of the cross-signing keys can
be stored on the server or shared with other devices. When doing so, the
master signing, user-signing, and self-signing keys are identified using the
names `m.cross_signing.master`, `m.cross_signing.user_signing`, and
`m.cross_signing.self_signing`, respectively, and the keys are base64-encoded
before being encrypted.
###### Key and signature security
A user's master key could allow an attacker to impersonate that user to
A user's master signing key could allow an attacker to impersonate that user to
other users, or other users to that user. Thus clients must ensure that
the private part of the master key is treated securely. If clients do
not have a secure means of storing the master key (such as a secret
the private part of the master signing key is treated securely. If clients do
not have a secure means of storing the master signing key (such as a secret
storage system provided by the operating system), then clients must not
store the private part.
@ -1057,9 +1060,9 @@ Since device key IDs (`ed25519:DEVICE_ID`) and cross-signing key IDs
use the correct keys when verifying.
While servers MUST not allow devices to have the same IDs as cross-signing
keys, a malicious server could construct such a situation, so clients must not
rely on the server being well-behaved and should take the following precautions
against this.
keys, a malicious server could construct such a situation, so clients
must not rely on the server being well-behaved and should take the following
precautions against this:
1. Clients MUST refer to keys by their public keys during the verification
process, rather than only by the key ID.
@ -1067,31 +1070,32 @@ against this.
verification process, and ensure that they do not change in the course of
verification.
3. Clients SHOULD also display a warning and MUST refuse to verify a user when
they detect that the user has a device with the same ID as a cross-signing key.
they detect that the user has a device with the same ID as a cross-signing
key.
A user's user-signing and self-signing keys are intended to be easily
replaceable if they are compromised by re-issuing a new key signed by
the user's master key and possibly by re-verifying devices or users.
the user's master signing key and possibly by re-verifying devices or users.
However, doing so relies on the user being able to notice when their
keys have been compromised, and it involves extra work for the user, and
so although clients do not have to treat the private parts as
sensitively as the master key, clients should still make efforts to
sensitively as the master signing key, clients should still make efforts to
store the private part securely, or not store it at all. Clients will
need to balance the security of the keys with the usability of signing
users and devices when performing key verification.
To avoid leaking of social graphs, servers will only allow users to see:
- signatures made by the user's own master, self-signing or
- signatures made by the user's own master signing, self-signing or
user-signing keys,
- signatures made by the user's own devices about their own master
key,
- signatures made by other users' self-signing keys about their
respective devices,
- signatures made by other users' master keys about their respective
- signatures made by other users' master signing keys about their respective
self-signing key, or
- signatures made by other users' devices about their respective
master keys.
master signing keys.
Users will not be able to see signatures made by other users'
user-signing keys.
@ -1193,24 +1197,24 @@ The binary segment MUST be of the following form:
- one byte indicating the QR code verification mode. Should be one of the
following values:
- `0x00` verifying another user with cross-signing
- `0x01` self-verifying in which the current device does trust the master key
- `0x01` self-verifying in which the current device does trust the master signing key
- `0x02` self-verifying in which the current device does not yet trust the
master key
master signing key
- the event ID or `transaction_id` of the associated verification
request event, encoded as:
- two bytes in network byte order (big-endian) indicating the length in
bytes of the ID as a UTF-8 string
- the ID encoded as a UTF-8 string
- the first key, as 32 bytes. The key to use depends on the mode field:
- if `0x00` or `0x01`, then the current user's own master cross-signing public key
- if `0x00` or `0x01`, then the current user's own master signing public key
- if `0x02`, then the current device's Ed25519 signing key
- the second key, as 32 bytes. The key to use depends on the mode field:
- if `0x00`, then what the device thinks the other user's master
cross-signing public key is
public key is
- if `0x01`, then what the device thinks the other device's Ed25519 signing
public key is
- if `0x02`, then what the device thinks the user's master cross-signing public
key is
- if `0x02`, then what the device thinks the user's master signing public key
is
- a random shared secret, as a sequence of bytes. It is suggested to use a secret
that is about 8 bytes long. Note: as we do not share the length of the
secret, and it is not a fixed size, clients will just use the remainder of
@ -1221,14 +1225,14 @@ For example, if Alice displays a QR code encoding the following binary data:
```nohighlight
"MATRIX" |ver|mode| len | event ID
4D 41 54 52 49 58 02 00 00 2D 21 41 42 43 44 ...
| user's cross-signing key | other user's cross-signing key | shared secret
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ... 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
| the first key | the second key | shared secret
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ... 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
```
this indicates that Alice is verifying another user (say Bob), in response to
the request from event "$ABCD...", her cross-signing key is
Mode `0x00` indicates that Alice is verifying another user (say Bob), in
response to the request from event "$ABCD...", her master signing key is
`0001020304050607...` (which is "AAECAwQFBg..." in base64), she thinks that
Bob's cross-signing key is `1011121314151617...` (which is "EBESExQVFh..." in
Bob's master signing key is `1011121314151617...` (which is "EBESExQVFh..." in
base64), and the shared secret is `2021222324252627` (which is "ICEiIyQlJic" in
base64).
@ -1300,8 +1304,8 @@ one of its variants.
Clients must only store keys in backups after they have ensured that the
`auth_data` is trusted. This can be done either by:
- checking that it is signed by the user's [master cross-signing
key](#cross-signing) or by a verified device belonging to the same user, or
- checking that it is signed by the user's [master signing key](#cross-signing)
or by a verified device belonging to the same user, or
- deriving the public key from a private key that it obtained from a trusted
source. Trusted sources for the private key include the user entering the
key, retrieving the key stored in [secret storage](#secret-storage), or

View file

@ -868,8 +868,10 @@ selecting a resident from the candidate list, and using the
enough information for the joining server to fill in the event.
The joining server is expected to add or replace the `origin`,
`origin_server_ts`, and `event_id` on the templated event received by
the resident server. This event is then signed by the joining server.
`origin_server_ts`, and `event_id` on the templated event received by the
resident server. The joining server MUST also verify that the `type`, `room_id`,
`sender`, `state_key` and `content.membership` fields have the expected values.
This event is then signed by the joining server.
To complete the join handshake, the joining server submits this new event
to the resident server it used for `GET /make_join`, using the `PUT /send_join`

View file

@ -32,9 +32,9 @@ paths:
except when used by an application service.
User-Interactive Authentication MUST be performed for regular clients, except in these cases:
- there is no existing cross-signing master key uploaded to the homeserver, OR
- there is an existing cross-signing master key and it exactly matches the
cross-signing master key provided in the request body. If there are any additional
- there is no existing master signing key uploaded to the homeserver, OR
- there is an existing master signing key and it exactly matches the
master signing key provided in the request body. If there are any additional
keys provided in the request (self-signing key, user-signing key) they MUST also
match the existing keys stored on the server. In other words, the request contains
no new keys.
@ -61,22 +61,22 @@ paths:
type: object
properties:
master_key:
description: Optional. The user\'s master key.
description: Optional. The user\'s master signing key.
allOf:
- $ref: definitions/cross_signing_key.yaml
self_signing_key:
description: |-
Optional. The user\'s self-signing key. Must be signed by
the accompanying master key, or by the user\'s most recently
uploaded master key if no master key is included in the
the accompanying master signing key, or by the user\'s most recently
uploaded master signing key if no master signing key is included in the
request.
allOf:
- $ref: definitions/cross_signing_key.yaml
user_signing_key:
description: |-
Optional. The user\'s user-signing key. Must be signed by
the accompanying master key, or by the user\'s most recently
uploaded master key if no master key is included in the
the accompanying master signing key, or by the user\'s most recently
uploaded master signing key if no master signing key is included in the
request.
allOf:
- $ref: definitions/cross_signing_key.yaml
@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ paths:
* `M_INVALID_SIGNATURE`: For example, the self-signing or
user-signing key had an incorrect signature.
* `M_MISSING_PARAM`: No master key is available.
* `M_MISSING_PARAM`: No master signing key is available.
content:
application/json:
schema:

View file

@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
# limitations under the License.
type: object
title: CrossSigningKey
description: Cross signing key
description: Key used for cross signing
properties:
user_id:
type: string
@ -44,8 +44,8 @@ properties:
title: Signatures
description: |-
Signatures of the key, calculated using the process described at [Signing JSON](/appendices/#signing-json).
Optional for the master key. Other keys must be signed by the
user\'s master key.
Optional for the master signing key. Other keys must be signed by the
user\'s master signing key.
example: {
"@alice:example.com": {
"ed25519:alice+base64+master+key": "signature+of+key"

View file

@ -219,8 +219,8 @@ paths:
x-addedInMatrixVersion: "1.1"
type: object
description: |-
Information on the master cross-signing keys of the queried users.
A map from user ID, to master key information. For each key, the
Information on the master signing keys of the queried users.
A map from user ID, to master signing key information. For each key, the
information returned will be the same as uploaded via
`/keys/device_signing/upload`, along with the signatures
uploaded via `/keys/signatures/upload` that the requesting user

View file

@ -36,6 +36,28 @@ paths:
Also note that if the remote homeserver is already in the room, it will receive the
invite event twice; once through this endpoint, and again through a [federation
transaction](/server-server-api/#transactions).
Servers MUST apply certain validation to ensure they don't accidentally sign non-invite
events from a malicious server. A specific error code is not mandated, but servers SHOULD
return `M_INVALID_PARAM` if:
* The invite event fails a [signature check](/server-server-api/#validating-hashes-and-signatures-on-received-events).
* The event type is not `m.room.member`.
* The `membership` field inside the event content is not `invite`.
* The event sender is not a user ID on the origin server.
* The `state_key` is not a user ID on the receiving server.
The `invite_room_state` has additional validation, which servers MAY apply to room versions
1 through 11 and SHOULD apply to all other room versions. As with the above errors, servers
SHOULD return `M_INVALID_PARAM` if:
* The `m.room.create` event is missing from `invite_room_state`.
* One or more entries in `invite_room_state` are not formatted according
to the room's version.
* One or more events fails a [signature check](/server-server-api/#validating-hashes-and-signatures-on-received-events).
* One or more events does not reside in the same room as the invite.
Note: Some room versions may require calculating the room ID for an
event rather than relying on the presence of `room_id`.
operationId: sendInviteV1
security:
- signedRequest: []
@ -83,8 +105,7 @@ paths:
MUST additionally be formatted according to the room version specification.
Servers might need to apply validation to the `invite_room_state` depending
on room version. See the `400 M_MISSING_PARAM` error definition for more
information.
on room version. See endpoint description for more information.
Note that events have a different format depending on the room
version - check the [room version specification](/rooms) for
@ -178,23 +199,7 @@ paths:
}
"400":
description: |-
The `M_MISSING_PARAM` error code is used to indicate one or more of
the following:
* The `m.room.create` event is missing from `invite_room_state`.
* One or more entries in `invite_room_state` are not formatted according
to the room's version.
* One or more events fails a [signature check](/server-server-api/#validating-hashes-and-signatures-on-received-events).
* One or more events does not reside in the same room as the invite.
Note: Some room versions may require calculating the room ID for an
event rather than relying on the presence of `room_id`.
Servers MAY apply the validation above to room versions 1 through 11,
and SHOULD apply the validation above to all other room versions.
If `M_MISSING_PARAM` is returned and the request is associated with a
Client-Server API request, the Client-Server API request SHOULD fail
with a 5xx error rather than being passed through.
The request is invalid in some way.
content:
application/json:
schema:
@ -202,7 +207,7 @@ paths:
examples:
response:
value: {
"errcode": "M_MISSING_PARAM",
"errcode": "M_INVALID_PARAM",
"error": "Create event not among invite state entries."
}
servers:

View file

@ -40,6 +40,28 @@ paths:
Also note that if the remote homeserver is already in the room, it will receive the
invite event twice; once through this endpoint, and again through a [federation
transaction](/server-server-api/#transactions).
Servers MUST apply certain validation to ensure they don't accidentally sign non-invite
events from a malicious server. A specific error code is not mandated, but servers SHOULD
return `M_INVALID_PARAM` if:
* The invite event fails a [signature check](/server-server-api/#validating-hashes-and-signatures-on-received-events).
* The event type is not `m.room.member`.
* The `membership` field inside the event content is not `invite`.
* The event sender is not a user ID on the origin server.
* The `state_key` is not a user ID on the receiving server.
The `invite_room_state` has additional validation, which servers MAY apply to room versions
1 through 11 and SHOULD apply to all other room versions. As with the above errors, servers
SHOULD return `M_INVALID_PARAM` if:
* The `m.room.create` event is missing from `invite_room_state`.
* One or more entries in `invite_room_state` are not formatted according
to the room's version.
* One or more events fails a [signature check](/server-server-api/#validating-hashes-and-signatures-on-received-events).
* One or more events does not reside in the same room as the invite.
Note: Some room versions may require calculating the room ID for an
event rather than relying on the presence of `room_id`.
operationId: sendInviteV2
security:
- signedRequest: []
@ -84,8 +106,7 @@ paths:
MUST additionally be formatted according to the room version specification.
Servers might need to apply validation to the `invite_room_state` depending
on room version. See the `400 M_MISSING_PARAM` error definition for more
information.
on room version. See the endpoint description for more information.
Note that events have a different format depending on the room
version - check the [room version specification](/rooms) for
@ -154,22 +175,8 @@ paths:
The error should be passed through to clients so that they
may give better feedback to users.
The `M_MISSING_PARAM` error code is used to indicate one or more of
the following:
* The `m.room.create` event is missing from `invite_room_state`.
* One or more entries in `invite_room_state` are not formatted according
to the room's version.
* One or more events fails a [signature check](/server-server-api/#validating-hashes-and-signatures-on-received-events).
* One or more events does not reside in the same room as the invite.
Note: Some room versions may require calculating the room ID for an
event rather than relying on the presence of `room_id`.
Servers MAY apply the validation above to room versions 1 through 11,
and SHOULD apply the validation above to all other room versions.
If `M_MISSING_PARAM` is returned and the request is associated with a
Client-Server API request, the Client-Server API request SHOULD fail
If `M_MISSING_PARAM` or `M_INVALID_PARAM` is returned and the request is associated
with a Client-Server API request, the Client-Server API request SHOULD fail
with a 5xx error rather than being passed through.
content:
application/json:

View file

@ -23,6 +23,17 @@ paths:
description: |-
Asks the receiving server to return information that the sending
server will need to prepare a join event to get into the room.
Before signing the returned template and calling `/send_join`,
the sending server MUST verify that:
* the `room_id` is equal to the `roomId` path parameter.
* both the `sender` and `state_key` are equal to the `userId` path parameter.
* the `type` of the event is `m.room.member`.
* the `membership` field inside `content` is `join`.
In case any of the above checks fail, the response MUST be treated as malformed and
discarded. The caller MAY try to join through another server.
operationId: makeJoin
security:
- signedRequest: []
@ -36,7 +47,7 @@ paths:
type: string
- in: path
name: userId
description: The user ID the join event will be for.
description: The user ID the join event will be for. This MUST be a user ID on the origin server.
required: true
example: "@someone:example.org"
schema:
@ -238,6 +249,15 @@ paths:
**The request and response body here describe the common
event fields in more detail and may be missing other required
fields for a PDU.**
The receiving server MUST apply certain validation before accepting the event.
A specific error code is not mandated, but servers SHOULD return `M_INVALID_PARAM` if:
* The join event fails a [signature check](/server-server-api/#validating-hashes-and-signatures-on-received-events).
* The event type is not `m.room.member`.
* The `membership` field inside the event content is not `join`.
* The event sender is not a user ID on the origin server.
* The `state_key` is not equal to the `sender`.
operationId: sendJoinV1
security:
- signedRequest: []
@ -388,6 +408,33 @@ paths:
}
}
]
"400":
description: |-
The request is invalid in some way.
content:
application/json:
schema:
$ref: ../client-server/definitions/errors/error.yaml
examples:
response:
value: {
"errcode": "M_INVALID_PARAM",
"error": "Not a join event."
}
"403":
description: |-
The room that the joining server is attempting to join does not permit the user
to join.
content:
application/json:
schema:
$ref: ../client-server/definitions/errors/error.yaml
examples:
response:
value: {
"errcode": "M_FORBIDDEN",
"error": "You are not invited to this room"
}
servers:
- url: "{protocol}://{hostname}{basePath}"
variables:

View file

@ -38,6 +38,15 @@ paths:
**The request and response body here describe the common
event fields in more detail and may be missing other required
fields for a PDU.**
The receiving server MUST apply certain validation before accepting the event.
A specific error code is not mandated, but servers SHOULD return `M_INVALID_PARAM` if:
* The join event fails a [signature check](/server-server-api/#validating-hashes-and-signatures-on-received-events).
* The event type is not `m.room.member`.
* The `membership` field inside the event content is not `join`.
* The event sender is not a user ID on the origin server.
* The `state_key` is not equal to the `sender`.
operationId: sendJoinV2
security:
- signedRequest: []
@ -247,6 +256,10 @@ paths:
The error should be passed through to clients so that they
may give better feedback to users.
If `M_MISSING_PARAM` or `M_INVALID_PARAM` is returned and the request is associated
with a Client-Server API request, the Client-Server API request SHOULD fail
with a 5xx error rather than being passed through.
New in `v1.2`, the following error conditions might happen:
If the room is [restricted](/client-server-api/#restricted-rooms)

View file

@ -23,6 +23,17 @@ paths:
description: |-
Asks the receiving server to return information that the sending
server will need to prepare a knock event for the room.
Before signing the returned template and calling `/send_knock`,
the sending server MUST verify that:
* the `room_id` is equal to the `roomId` path parameter.
* both the `sender` and `state_key` are equal to the `userId` path parameter.
* the `type` of the event is `m.room.member`.
* the `membership` field inside `content` is `knock`.
In case any of the above checks fail, the response MUST be treated as malformed and
discarded. The caller MAY try to knock through another server.
operationId: makeKnock
security:
- signedRequest: []
@ -36,7 +47,7 @@ paths:
type: string
- in: path
name: userId
description: The user ID the knock event will be for.
description: The user ID the knock event will be for. This MUST be a user ID on the origin server.
required: true
example: "@someone:example.org"
schema:
@ -204,6 +215,15 @@ paths:
**The request and response body here describe the common
event fields in more detail and may be missing other required
fields for a PDU.**
The receiving server MUST apply certain validation before accepting the event.
A specific error code is not mandated, but servers SHOULD return `M_INVALID_PARAM` if:
* The knock event fails a [signature check](/server-server-api/#validating-hashes-and-signatures-on-received-events).
* The event type is not `m.room.member`.
* The `membership` field inside the event content is not `knock`.
* The event sender is not a user ID on the origin server.
* The `state_key` is not equal to the `sender`.
operationId: sendKnock
security:
- signedRequest: []
@ -330,6 +350,19 @@ paths:
"$ref": "./examples/invite_or_knock_state.json"
}
}
"400":
description: |-
The request is invalid in some way.
content:
application/json:
schema:
$ref: ../client-server/definitions/errors/error.yaml
examples:
response:
value: {
"errcode": "M_INVALID_PARAM",
"error": "Not a knock event."
}
"403":
description: |-
The knocking server or user is not permitted to knock on the room, such as when the

View file

@ -23,6 +23,17 @@ paths:
description: |-
Asks the receiving server to return information that the sending
server will need to prepare a leave event to get out of the room.
Before signing the returned template and calling `/send_leave`,
the sending server MUST verify that:
* the `room_id` is equal to the `roomId` path parameter.
* both the `sender` and `state_key` are equal to the `userId` path parameter.
* the `type` of the event is `m.room.member`.
* the `membership` field inside `content` is `leave`.
In case any of the above checks fail, the response MUST be treated as malformed and
discarded. The caller MAY try to leave through another server.
operationId: makeLeave
security:
- signedRequest: []
@ -36,7 +47,7 @@ paths:
type: string
- in: path
name: userId
description: The user ID the leave event will be for.
description: The user ID the leave event will be for. This MUST be a user ID on the origin server.
required: true
example: "@someone:example.org"
schema:
@ -153,6 +164,15 @@ paths:
**The request and response body here describe the common
event fields in more detail and may be missing other required
fields for a PDU.**
The receiving server MUST apply certain validation before accepting the event.
A specific error code is not mandated, but servers SHOULD return `M_INVALID_PARAM` if:
* The leave event fails a [signature check](/server-server-api/#validating-hashes-and-signatures-on-received-events).
* The event type is not `m.room.member`.
* The `membership` field inside the event content is not `leave`.
* The event sender is not a user ID on the origin server.
* The `state_key` is not equal to the `sender`.
operationId: sendLeaveV1
security:
- signedRequest: []
@ -249,6 +269,19 @@ paths:
200,
{}
]
"400":
description: |-
The request is invalid in some way.
content:
application/json:
schema:
$ref: ../client-server/definitions/errors/error.yaml
examples:
response:
value: {
"errcode": "M_INVALID_PARAM",
"error": "Not a leave event."
}
servers:
- url: "{protocol}://{hostname}{basePath}"
variables:

View file

@ -38,6 +38,15 @@ paths:
**The request and response body here describe the common
event fields in more detail and may be missing other required
fields for a PDU.**
The receiving server MUST apply certain validation before accepting the event.
A specific error code is not mandated, but servers SHOULD return `M_INVALID_PARAM` if:
* The leave event fails a [signature check](/server-server-api/#validating-hashes-and-signatures-on-received-events).
* The event type is not `m.room.member`.
* The `membership` field inside the event content is not `leave`.
* The event sender is not a user ID on the origin server.
* The `state_key` is not equal to the `sender`.
operationId: sendLeaveV2
security:
- signedRequest: []
@ -134,6 +143,19 @@ paths:
examples:
response:
value: {}
"400":
description: |-
The request is invalid in some way.
content:
application/json:
schema:
$ref: ../client-server/definitions/errors/error.yaml
examples:
response:
value: {
"errcode": "M_INVALID_PARAM",
"error": "Not a leave event."
}
servers:
- url: "{protocol}://{hostname}{basePath}"
variables:

View file

@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ paths:
- keys
master_key:
type: object
description: The user\'s master cross-signing key.
description: The user\'s master signing key.
allOf:
- $ref: ../client-server/definitions/cross_signing_key.yaml
- example:

View file

@ -194,8 +194,8 @@ paths:
x-addedInMatrixVersion: "1.1"
type: object
description: |-
Information on the master cross-signing keys of the queried users.
A map from user ID, to master key information. For each key, the
Information on the master signing keys of the queried users.
A map from user ID, to master signing key information. For each key, the
information returned will be the same as uploaded via
`/keys/device_signing/upload`, along with the signatures
uploaded via `/keys/signatures/upload` that the user is