crypto(feat): Key distribution errors for pin violations #3662

BillCarsonFr · 2024-07-08T13:00:36Z

Part of invisible crypto, follow up of #3639

Following support for key pinning, we have now to manage pinning violation when encrypting olm messages (room key distribution).

The new encryption errors:

/// Depending on the sharing strategy for room keys, the distribution of the
/// room key could fail.
#[derive(Error, Debug)]
pub enum RoomKeyDistributionError {
    /// When encrypting using the IdentityBased strategy.
    /// Will be thrown when sharing room keys when there is a new identity for a
    /// user that has not been confirmed by the user.
    /// Application should display identity changes to the user as soon as
    /// possible to avoid hitting this case. If it happens the app might
    /// just retry automatically after the identity change has been
    /// notified, or offer option to cancel.
    #[error("Encryption failed because there are key pinning violation, please re-pin or verify the problematic users")]
    KeyPinningViolation(Vec<OwnedUserId>),

    /// Cross-signing is required for encryption with invisible crypto
    #[error("Encryption failed: Setup cross-signing on your account")]
    CrossSigningNotSetup,
    /// The current device needs to be verified when encrypting using the
    /// IdentityBased strategy. Apps should prevent sending in the UI to
    /// avoid hitting this case.
    #[error("Encryption failed: Verify your device to send encrypted messages")]
    SendingFromUnverifiedDevice,
}

Public API changes documented in changelogs (optional)

Signed-off-by:

…h_pin

codecov · 2024-08-06T20:19:48Z

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 91.93548% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 84.18%. Comparing base (70f46d4) to head (afda06a).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...c/session_manager/group_sessions/share_strategy.rs	91.93%	5 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3662      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   84.12%   84.18%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         263      263              
  Lines       27584    27621      +37     
==========================================
+ Hits        23205    23252      +47     
+ Misses       4379     4369      -10

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

jmartinesp

I can't say much about the crypto logic, but the code LGTM and the docs and comments made it a bit easier to understand, thanks. I have a couple of comments, but feel free to ignore them.

crates/matrix-sdk-crypto/src/session_manager/group_sessions/share_strategy.rs

jmartinesp · 2024-08-07T06:53:10Z

crates/matrix-sdk-crypto/src/session_manager/group_sessions/share_strategy.rs

+        let shared: BTreeSet<OwnedDeviceId> = shared.keys().cloned().collect();
+        let shared: BTreeSet<&DeviceId> = shared.iter().map(|d| d.as_ref()).collect();


Do we need to collect it twice?

+1. I fixed another copy of this code recently in 1e58c03

richvdh · 2024-08-08T14:01:40Z

Per #3565 (comment): this needs an update so that an error is not thrown if a TOFU-trusted user has rotated their identity.

…h_pin

richvdh

A few comments. Also, needs a changelog entry.

richvdh · 2024-08-16T14:07:51Z

crates/matrix-sdk-crypto/src/error.rs

+    #[error(transparent)]
+    /// The room key that was to be shared was not shared because the sharing
+    /// strategy could not be fulfilled.
+    RoomKeySharingStrategyError(RoomKeySharingStrategyError),


#3810 added a "SessionRecipientCollectionError" which I think we should be using here, rather than adding a new error type.

richvdh · 2024-08-16T14:08:43Z

crates/matrix-sdk-crypto/src/session_manager/group_sessions/share_strategy.rs

+        let strategy = CollectStrategy::new_identity_based();
+
+        let encryption_settings =
+            EncryptionSettings { sharing_strategy: strategy.clone(), ..Default::default() };


no need to .clone() here. Could just inline strategy

richvdh · 2024-08-16T14:11:08Z

testing/matrix-sdk-test/src/test_json/keys_query_sets.rs

+    }
+
+    pub fn initial_key_query() -> KeyQueryResponse {
+        let data = response_from_file(&json!({


#3823 removed response_from_file

richvdh · 2024-08-16T14:11:30Z

testing/matrix-sdk-test/src/test_json/keys_query_sets.rs

+        device_id!("NZFSPBRLDO")
+    }
+
+    pub fn initial_key_query() -> KeyQueryResponse {


could you give all these methods a doc-comment explaining what they mean?

richvdh · 2024-08-16T14:12:45Z

crates/matrix-sdk-crypto/src/session_manager/group_sessions/share_strategy.rs

+    #[async_test]
+    async fn test_share_identity_strategy_no_cross_signing() {


it would be good to add a doc-comment for each of these tests explaining what they are testing.

richvdh · 2024-08-16T14:18:57Z

crates/matrix-sdk-crypto/src/session_manager/group_sessions/share_strategy.rs

+            )
+            .await;
+
+        assert!(request_result.is_ok());


this is normally spelt .unwrap()

richvdh · 2024-08-16T14:19:38Z

crates/matrix-sdk-crypto/src/session_manager/group_sessions/share_strategy.rs

+                let request_result = machine
+                    .share_room_key(
+                        fake_room_id,
+                        // vec![KeyDistributionTestData::dan_id()].into_iter(),


richvdh · 2024-08-16T14:20:12Z

crates/matrix-sdk-crypto/src/session_manager/group_sessions/share_strategy.rs

+    }
+
+    #[async_test]
+    async fn test_share_identity_strategy_report_pinning_violation() {


as well as a all the cleanups suggested for the other test, this test could do with some comments to explain what's going on.

richvdh · 2024-08-16T14:21:46Z

crates/matrix-sdk-crypto/src/session_manager/group_sessions/share_strategy.rs

+    let mut devices: BTreeMap<OwnedUserId, Vec<DeviceData>> = Default::default();
+    let mut withheld_devices: Vec<(DeviceData, WithheldCode)> = Default::default();


not sure that moving this declaration is helpful?

richvdh · 2024-08-16T14:23:19Z

crates/matrix-sdk-crypto/src/session_manager/group_sessions/share_strategy.rs


-    for user_id in users {


This feels like a big refactor, combined with behavioural changes. Please could we have the refactor and the behavioral change as separate commits?

richvdh · 2024-08-16T14:30:08Z

crates/matrix-sdk-crypto/src/session_manager/group_sessions/share_strategy.rs

+            .other()
+            .unwrap()


I think some of these .other().unwrap() calls become unnecessary with #3847

uhoreg · 2024-08-23T23:02:24Z

I "merged" main into here (by which, I mean that I rewrote the changes on top of current main, plus #3884), and tried to use the new has_identity_verification_violation function that was introduced to make it error when we had a previously-verified user under the device-based strategy. But I noticed that that function doesn't take identity pinning into account, which I guess is fine for the device-based strategy. But with the fact that we are no longer erroring on TOFU user rotations, I'm wondering if we even need pinning any more.

…anges (#3884) This is part of #3662, pulled out to into a separate PR. Recent changes in `main` made it pretty much impossible to merge this section of code from `main` into that PR, and Rich wanted to see the refactoring bits separate from the behavioural changes. So I've re-written the refactoring. Pulls the `match` on `sharing_strategy` outside of the `for` loop, and moves any code that is specific to one strategy into the appropriate branch.

richvdh · 2024-09-02T12:48:45Z

@uhoreg what is the state of this PR? Can it be closed, in favour of #3896?

uhoreg · 2024-09-03T12:54:40Z

Obsoleted by #3896

BillCarsonFr added 8 commits July 22, 2024 17:07

feature(crypto): Add support for master key local pinning

67af31a

Review: Do not use msk abbreviation

8253618

Review: Use TryFrom instead of From for serializer helper struct

b7241c3

Review: Fix typo

4d66828

Review: Improve doc

c045d26

Review: Fix data set comments

bfb8818

Review: Improve comments

fb39a9e

Clippy | unneeded clone

1d4cefb

BillCarsonFr force-pushed the valere/invisible_crypto/identity_local_tofu_2 branch from daf7331 to 1d4cefb Compare July 22, 2024 15:29

BillCarsonFr added 4 commits July 22, 2024 17:47

refactor: Rename serializer helper to match new OtherUserIdentityData

de60e6e

crypto: refactor extract detection of removed device from outbound

7803617

refactor: Move user loop inside strategy specific branch

9b00de3

feat(crypto): Key distribution errors for Pin violations

e309219

BillCarsonFr force-pushed the valere/invisible_crypto/identity_sharing_with_pin branch from 8fbd9a4 to e309219 Compare July 23, 2024 08:46

uhoreg mentioned this pull request Jul 24, 2024

Configurable sender trust checking on decrypting #3701

Closed

1 task

Base automatically changed from valere/invisible_crypto/identity_local_tofu_2 to main August 2, 2024 07:13

uhoreg added 3 commits August 2, 2024 16:08

naming and formatting changes

2a174b0

Merge branch 'main' into valere/invisible_crypto/identity_sharing_wit…

462b39a

…h_pin

don't share with our own device

c2332ce

uhoreg marked this pull request as ready for review August 6, 2024 20:00

uhoreg requested a review from a team as a code owner August 6, 2024 20:00

uhoreg requested review from jmartinesp and removed request for a team August 6, 2024 20:00

jmartinesp approved these changes Aug 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

uhoreg added 3 commits August 9, 2024 14:41

Merge branch 'main' into valere/invisible_crypto/identity_sharing_wit…

ff46fc1

…h_pin

remove commented-out debugging line

6b03ef3

only error with a pin violation if they were previously verified

afda06a

uhoreg requested a review from a team as a code owner August 9, 2024 21:32

uhoreg requested review from richvdh and removed request for a team August 9, 2024 21:32

richvdh requested changes Aug 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

richvdh reviewed Aug 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

uhoreg added 2 commits August 16, 2024 23:27

apply changes from review

fd15720

document tests

f75934f

uhoreg mentioned this pull request Aug 22, 2024

refactor collect_session_recipients in advance of some behavioural changes #3884

Merged

uhoreg mentioned this pull request Aug 27, 2024

crypto: Error when sending keys to previously-verified users with identity-based strategy #3896

Merged

1 task

richvdh mentioned this pull request Aug 27, 2024

Require acknowledgement to send to a verified user if their identity changed or a device is unverified element-hq/element-web#27943

Closed

bnjbvr changed the title ~~feat(crypto): Key distribution errors for pin violations~~ crypto(feat): Key distribution errors for pin violations Sep 3, 2024

uhoreg closed this Sep 3, 2024

poljar deleted the valere/invisible_crypto/identity_sharing_with_pin branch November 5, 2024 11:45

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

crypto(feat): Key distribution errors for pin violations #3662

crypto(feat): Key distribution errors for pin violations #3662

BillCarsonFr commented Jul 8, 2024

codecov bot commented Aug 6, 2024 •

edited

Loading

jmartinesp left a comment

jmartinesp Aug 7, 2024

richvdh Aug 16, 2024

richvdh commented Aug 8, 2024

richvdh left a comment

richvdh Aug 16, 2024

richvdh Aug 16, 2024

richvdh Aug 16, 2024

richvdh Aug 16, 2024

richvdh Aug 16, 2024

richvdh Aug 16, 2024

richvdh Aug 16, 2024

richvdh Aug 16, 2024

richvdh Aug 16, 2024

richvdh Aug 16, 2024

richvdh Aug 16, 2024

uhoreg commented Aug 23, 2024

richvdh commented Sep 2, 2024

uhoreg commented Sep 3, 2024

		let shared: BTreeSet<OwnedDeviceId> = shared.keys().cloned().collect();
		let shared: BTreeSet<&DeviceId> = shared.iter().map(\|d\| d.as_ref()).collect();

		#[async_test]
		async fn test_share_identity_strategy_no_cross_signing() {

		let mut devices: BTreeMap<OwnedUserId, Vec<DeviceData>> = Default::default();
		let mut withheld_devices: Vec<(DeviceData, WithheldCode)> = Default::default();

crypto(feat): Key distribution errors for pin violations #3662

crypto(feat): Key distribution errors for pin violations #3662

Conversation

BillCarsonFr commented Jul 8, 2024

codecov bot commented Aug 6, 2024 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

jmartinesp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

richvdh commented Aug 8, 2024

richvdh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

uhoreg commented Aug 23, 2024

richvdh commented Sep 2, 2024

uhoreg commented Sep 3, 2024

codecov bot commented Aug 6, 2024 •

edited

Loading