[SIP Beyond VoIP] Sylkserver Participant Management
ag at ag-projects.com
Tue Jul 16 12:35:59 CEST 2013
On Jul 16, 2013, at 12:18 PM, Michiel Leenaars <michiel.ml at nlnet.nl> wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
>>> It worked well for me, I'm happy to report. I played around with
>>> participant management. One thing I noticed: am I correct that I could
>>> not only remove people in the room that I had invited to a Sylkserver
>>> conference myself - with add_participant user at domain.com - but also
>>> other people unrelated to me (as in: my other account when it had
>>> registered itself independently to the chatroom)? That seems undesirable
>>> to me - some chatbot can come in and kick out all the participants from
>>> all rooms.
>> How do you know the room names?
> I think security by obscurity works reasonably well for ad hoc meetings,
> although probing is cheap (e.g. dictionary attack). You could add
> something to the server that allows to see if someone is trying out many
> different rooms for activity sequentially. That would raise that cost
> and help prevent abuse.
How do you try in a sequence a random string?
wfewbehuwgr3uruo3pi503957823bc56 at conference.sip2sip.info
is a valid room.
How to you guess it?
Also trying requires infinite time as a call setup takes several seconds to complete. Then what do you have to gain probing random chat rooms? There is no incentive to do that.
> Other use cases are different from ad hoc conferences like you mention,
> I guess more like a classic IRC channel that is persistent and
> publically known.
For this you can define static rooms in server configuration. Only SIP addresses configured for the room can join. Unfortunately SIP does not have primitives for creating room policy.
> This would be akin to a publicly announced conference
> room where potentially many people participate over a longer period. In
> that case confidentiality is not the issue, but it would be embarassing
> if thousands of people are dropped off because of one person trolling.
Well, such lists can be managed out of band, but this is complex functionality.
Remember that SylkServer implements ad-hoc rooms, we never claimed such policy can be managed. Ad hoc simply do not have such advanced policy, there are just simple to use. Simple to use is key, if stuff is complicated and requires management very few adopt it.
> Also, it would be great if someone could somehow be granted a channel
> operator role (perhaps not on sip2sip.info service, but in case of a
> self installed system).
Well, sky is the limit for developing such advanced features if resources allow it. I also have tons of additions in my head, webrtc end-point, web page management, streaming...
>> Yes, it would be nice to have such controls, but without extra
>> developments they are not possible out of the box.
> Understood. We definitely need more manpower to work on these important
> projects. We can't expect you and your team to solve everything for us.
> Michiel Leenaars
> drs. M.A.G.J. Leenaars
> Director of Strategy
> NLnet foundation
> Science Park 400
> 1098 XH Amsterdam
> sip/xmpp: michiel [@t] nlnet.nl
> 'If you want the Internet to grow strong, safe and free,
> but you don't know how to help, contribute to NLNet:
> they do know and care."
> Giorgio Maone, NoScript
> Interested what Richard Stallman, Karsten Nohl, Andy Tanenbaum and
> many others have to say about what NLnet helped them do for you?
> Feel your wallet tingling already? Check out:
> SIPBeyondVoIP mailing list
> SIPBeyondVoIP at lists.ag-projects.com
More information about the SIPBeyondVoIP