Since bcfbfbcff5 (part of
<https://akkoma.dev/AkkomaGang/akkoma/pulls/789>), the overhead for
cleaning up orphaned attachments has been drattically reduced.
Most admins are unaware of this option even existing, but may notice an
increase in the size of the uploads directory (or S3 bucket size if used
instead) even if auto-expiring posts are used. This should hopefully
make this problem more manageable.
For those that still encounter performance issues, the setting can still
be disabled if needed.
In theory a pedantic reading of the spec indeed suggests
DMs must only be delivered to personal inboxes. However,
in practice the normative force of real-world implementations
disagrees. Mastodon, Iceshrimp.NET and GtS (the latter notably has a
config option to never use sharedInboxes) all unconditionally prefer
sharedInbox for everything without ill effect. This saves on duplicate
deliveries on the sending and processing on the receiving end.
(Typically the receiving side ends up rejecting
all but the first copy as duplicates)
Furthermore current determine_inbox logic also actually needs up
forcing personal inboxes for follower-only posts, unless they
additionally explicitly address at least one specific actor.
This is even much wasteful and directly contradicts
the explicit intent of the spec.
There’s one part where the use of sharedInbox falls apart,
namely spec-compliant bcc and bto addressing. AP spec requires
bcc/bto fields to be stripped before delivery and then implicitly
reconstructed by the receiver based on the addressed personal inbox.
In practice however, this addressing mode is almost unused. Neither of
the three implementations brought up above supports it and while *oma
does use bcc for list addressing, it does not use it in a spec-compliant
way and even copies same-host recipients into cc before delivery.
Messages with bcc addressing are handled in another function clause,
always force personal inboxes for every recipient and not affected by
this commit.
In theory it would be beneficial to use sharedInbox there too for all
but bcc recipients. But in practice list addressing has been broken for
quite some time already and is not actually exposed in any frontend,
as discussed in https://akkoma.dev/AkkomaGang/akkoma/issues/812.
Therefore any changes here have virtually no effect anyway
and all code concerning it may just be outright removed.
Currently FlakeId.flake_id crashes if receiving non-UTF-8 binaries,
but we use it e.g. in the /:nick_or_id path used in akkoma-fe user
profiles.
With the upgrade such invalid binaries simply fail the id check.
Reported-in: https://meta.akkoma.dev/t/frontend-unicodeconversionerror/847
Since we later only consider the Create activity for
access permission checks, but the semantically more
sensible set of fields are the object’s.
Changing the check itself to use the object may have unintended
consequences on already existing legacy posts as the old code
which processed it when it arrived may have never considered
effects on the objects addressing fields.
While the object itself has the expected adressing for an
"unlisted" post, we always use the Create activity’s
adressing fields for permission checks.
To avoid unintended effects on legacy objects
we will continue to use the activity for access perm checks,
but fix its addressing fields based on its object data.
Ref: https://git.pleroma.social/pleroma/pleroma/-/issues/3323
This was accidentally broken in c8e0f7848b
due to a one-letter mistake in the plug option name and an absence of
tests. Therefore it was once again possible to serve e.g. Javascript or
CSS payloads via uploads and emoji.
However due to other protections it was still NOT possible for anyone to
serve any payload with an ActivityPub Content-Type. With the CSP policy
hardening from previous JS payload exloits predating the Content-Type
sanitisation, there is currently no known way of abusing this weakened
Content-Type sanitisation, but should be fixed regardless.
This commit fixes the option name and adds tests to ensure
such a regression doesn't occur again in the future.
Reported-by: Lain Soykaf <lain@lain.com>
