MSC4174: webpush push kind #4174

p1gp1g · 2024-08-01T15:52:06Z

rendered

Client implementation:
synapse impl: element-hq/synapse#17987
updated hydrogen impl: element-hq/hydrogen-web#1201

Signed-off-by: S1m <[email protected]>

turt2live · 2024-08-01T16:46:05Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

Implementation requirements:

Client

Server

@turt2live These requirements are now met

Client (Hydrogen) and Server (Synapse) implementations noted at #4174 (comment)

Johennes · 2024-08-05T08:42:57Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+are defined in the Push Gateway Specification. Currently the only format available is ’event_id_only'.
+- `url`: Required if `kind` is `http`, not used else. The URL to use to send notifications to. MUST be an
+HTTPS URL with a path of /_matrix/push/v1/notify
+- `endpoint`: Required if `kind` is `webpush`, not used else. The URL to send notification to, as defined as a


Probably a stupid question but could you not just reuse the url field?

I wanted to mention it in the alternative part. Clients that already use webpush and must use a push gateway uses endpoint because url is the one used for the gateway.

So, defining that way would make their current PusherData spec compliant

IMO, it would have been better to set pushKey and url in the PusherData too, but that's out of this proposal scope

I agree that re-using the current field seems simpler.

Re-using url as the http kind do ? Or Re-using endpoint like hydrogen and sygnal do ?

Reusing the endpoint -- this definitely needs a different kind.

Can I resolve this "conversation" then ?

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

clokep · 2024-08-05T16:05:51Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+Having a webpush push kind would provide push notifications without gateway to
+- Web app and desktop app
+- Android apps using UnifiedPush (MSC2970 was open for this and won't be required anymore)
+- Maybe other ? We have seen apple moving a lot into web push support


Are there links to this?

https://developer.apple.com/documentation/usernotifications/sending-web-push-notifications-in-web-apps-and-browsers

Should it be added to the MSC ?

https://gist.github.com/mar-v-in/2a054e3a4c0a508656549fc7d0aaeb74#webpush Shows how to push to FCM using webpush, without a gateway

Should it be added to the MSC ?

It is helpful to add links for folks who aren't very familiar with the topic, yes. People can always ignore links if they know!

Ok, I've added the 2 links

clokep · 2024-08-05T16:06:06Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+
+Having a webpush push kind would provide push notifications without gateway to
+- Web app and desktop app
+- Android apps using UnifiedPush (MSC2970 was open for this and won't be required anymore)


Links showing UnifiedPush supports this would be helpful!

The spec will be updated next month, and will be defined as RFC8030+RFC8291+RFC8292 aka webpush

Else, there is this comment: UnifiedPush/wishlist#15 (comment)

https://unifiedpush.org/ Images shows Web Push now

https://codeberg.org/UnifiedPush/specifications/src/branch/main/specifications/android.md#resources

Please inline these into the proposal instead of adding them as comments.

clokep · 2024-08-05T16:07:33Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+are defined in the Push Gateway Specification. Currently the only format available is ’event_id_only'.
+- `url`: Required if `kind` is `http`, not used else. The URL to use to send notifications to. MUST be an
+HTTPS URL with a path of /_matrix/push/v1/notify
+- `endpoint`: Required if `kind` is `webpush`, not used else. The URL to send notification to, as defined as a


I agree that re-using the current field seems simpler.

clokep · 2024-08-05T16:08:40Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+If the `kind` is `webpush`, this is the user agent public key encoded in base64 url. The public key comes from a ECDH
+keypair using the P-256 (prime256v1, cf. FIPS186) curve.


Links off to the sections of the RFCs that define how to do this would probably be good.

I don't see link to 25519 curve when ed25519 is mentioned, P-256 is a known curve. And this is already implemented in libraries

clokep · 2024-08-05T16:10:11Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+Security considerations are listed by RFC8030 [4], there are mainly resolved with RFC8291 (Encryption) and
+RFC8292 (VAPID).


To be clear -- Matrix would require all of these to be implemented then?

WebPush is defined by those 3 RFC, so it would require these RFC

It was unclear to me that "webpush" is all 3 vs. just the first one with optional additions.

clokep · 2024-08-05T16:12:00Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+[2] https://github.com/matrix-org/sygnal/blob/main/sygnal/webpushpushkin.py#L152
+[3] https://spec.matrix.org/v1.9/client-server-api/#post_matrixclientv3pushersset (search for PusherData)
+
+## Proposal


Examples of the request would be useful!

Client side, this is already ~ implemented by hydrogen just changing http to webpush

Server side, this has to be merged into the server: https://github.com/matrix-org/sygnal/blob/main/sygnal/webpushpushkin.py#L351

Isn't the whole point to bypass sygnal though?

Regardless, having examples in the MSC is important to show a full request/response.

Definitely, I just wanted to say that most of the code in sygnal webpushpushkin can be used to write a synapse webpushpusher

clokep · 2024-08-05T16:14:21Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+Push notifications have the problem that they typically go through third-party gateways in order to
+be delivered, e.g. FCM (Google) or APNs (Apple) and an app-specific gateway (sygnal). In order to
+prevent these push gateways from being able to read any sensitive information the `event_id_only` format
+was introduced, which only pushes the `event_id` and `room_id` of an event down the push. After
+receiving the push message the client can hit the `GET /_matrix/client/r0/rooms/{roomId}/event/{eventId}`
+to fetch the full event, and then create the notification based on that.


I think it isn't quite spelled out, but the goal here seems to be to avoid the push gateway, which avoids the application author seeing anything about the pushed information. So it allows going directly from homeserver -> push server.

2 things:

it avoids using a push gateway

it adds E2EE to the notifications, so the push server don't see the content of the notifications

I have reworded this §

p1gp1g · 2024-08-07T10:43:25Z

Thank you for your feedback @clokep, I'm updated the proposal soon

Reword some sentences, add links

p1gp1g · 2024-11-21T08:14:02Z

Client implementation: p1gp1g/hydrogen-web@e7cc488

Add capability and VAPID

MatMaul · 2024-12-02T10:25:37Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+A VAPID (Voluntary Application Server Identification, cf RFC8292) is often needed to be able to register with a push
+server.
+It is proposed to add a `m.webpush` capability to the `/capabilities` endpoint with this format:
+```
+"m.webpush": {
+	"enabled": true,
+	"vapid": "BNbXV88MfMI0fSxB7cDngopoviZRTbxIS0qSS-O7BZCtG04khMOn-PP2ueb_X7Aeci42n02kJ0-JJJ0uQ4ELRTs"
+}
+```
+It is also useful to decide if the client should register a pusher using `http` kind and and old style
+Sygnal WebPush semantic. A client that supports this kind of pusher should use it if the server supports it too, and
+not register another `http` pusher to avoid duplicate pushes.


Following implementation experimentation this part has been added.

MatMaul · 2024-12-02T22:57:54Z

synapse impl: element-hq/synapse#17987
updated hydrogen impl: element-hq/hydrogen-web#1201

tulir · 2025-01-21T16:11:24Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+
+## Proposal
+
+`PusherData` fields are now define as follow:


I think it'd be clearer if the MSC only described the things it's adding, rather than redefining PusherData. Right now it requires some effort to parse what's actually new

This is not very handy to not include the previous content. Every or webpush and lignes containing if kind is webpush have been added. The other things haven't been touched

tulir · 2025-01-21T16:18:21Z

Implementations seem to implement what's described in the MSC, so removing the needs-checking label

clokep · 2025-01-21T17:23:06Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+- Web app and desktop app
+- Android apps using UnifiedPush (MSC2970 was open for this and won't be required anymore)
+- Android apps using FCM (It is possible to push to FCM with webpush standard [7])
+- Maybe other ? We have seen apple moving a lot into web push support [8]


Sounds like this is a potential issue?

clokep · 2025-01-21T17:23:33Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+
+Having a webpush push kind would provide push notifications without gateway to
+- Web app and desktop app
+- Android apps using UnifiedPush (MSC2970 was open for this and won't be required anymore)


Please inline these into the proposal instead of adding them as comments.

clokep · 2025-01-21T17:24:15Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+are already available and robuste: they are reviewed, and acknowledge by experts.
+
+Having a webpush push kind would provide push notifications without gateway to
+- Web app and desktop app


So not really desktop apps, right? Not unless they're Electron or similar?

clokep · 2025-01-21T17:25:46Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+Security considerations are listed by RFC8030 [4], there are mainly resolved with RFC8291 (Encryption) and
+RFC8292 (VAPID).


It was unclear to me that "webpush" is all 3 vs. just the first one with optional additions.

clokep · 2025-01-21T17:27:48Z

proposals/4174-webpush-pushkind.md

+[7] https://gist.github.com/mar-v-in/2a054e3a4c0a508656549fc7d0aaeb74#webpush
+[8] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/usernotifications/sending-web-push-notifications-in-web-apps-and-browsers
+
+## Proposal


Not a requirement, but this is changing the architecture of Matrix, correct? By removing push gateways. Having an updated version of the diagram could be useful to show the simplification proposed.

p1gp1g force-pushed the webpush-pushkind branch from 0f3f077 to 6ccf76d Compare August 1, 2024 15:53

Add MSC for webpush push kind

24473e5

Signed-off-by: S1m <[email protected]>

p1gp1g force-pushed the webpush-pushkind branch from 6ccf76d to 24473e5 Compare August 1, 2024 15:54

p1gp1g changed the title ~~MSC webpush push kind~~ MSC4174: webpush push kind Aug 1, 2024

p1gp1g mentioned this pull request Aug 1, 2024

MSC3013: Encrypted Push #3013

Open

turt2live added push proposal A matrix spec change proposal client-server Client-Server API needs-implementation This MSC does not have a qualifying implementation for the SCT to review. The MSC cannot enter FCP. labels Aug 1, 2024

turt2live reviewed Aug 1, 2024

View reviewed changes

Johennes reviewed Aug 5, 2024

View reviewed changes

clokep reviewed Aug 5, 2024

View reviewed changes

Apply suggestions

2eae5a3

Reword some sentences, add links

p1gp1g mentioned this pull request Nov 1, 2024

Unified push endpoint: do not fallback to default endpoint in case of failure and add troubleshoot test. element-hq/element-x-android#3388

Merged

10 tasks

MatMaul and others added 4 commits December 1, 2024 22:46

Add capability and VAPID

0346332

Wording + typo

201ddc9

Small clarification

2f71bf3

Merge pull request #1 from MatMaul/webpush-pushkind

1f5b73c

Add capability and VAPID

MatMaul reviewed Dec 2, 2024

View reviewed changes

MatMaul mentioned this pull request Dec 2, 2024

Add support for webpush pusher as defined in MSC4174 element-hq/hydrogen-web#1201

Open

MatMaul mentioned this pull request Dec 3, 2024

MSC4174: add support for WebPush pusher kind element-hq/synapse#17987

Open

3 tasks

p1gp1g mentioned this pull request Dec 13, 2024

Push notifications via unifiedpush don't work SchildiChat/schildichat-android-next#38

Closed

uhoreg added implementation-needs-checking The MSC has an implementation, but the SCT has not yet checked it. and removed needs-implementation This MSC does not have a qualifying implementation for the SCT to review. The MSC cannot enter FCP. labels Dec 13, 2024

Add links for apple and google push standard

e413f9e

tulir reviewed Jan 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

tulir removed the implementation-needs-checking The MSC has an implementation, but the SCT has not yet checked it. label Jan 21, 2025

clokep reviewed Jan 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

		If the `kind` is `webpush`, this is the user agent public key encoded in base64 url. The public key comes from a ECDH
		keypair using the P-256 (prime256v1, cf. FIPS186) curve.

		Security considerations are listed by RFC8030 [4], there are mainly resolved with RFC8291 (Encryption) and
		RFC8292 (VAPID).

MSC4174: webpush push kind #4174

Are you sure you want to change the base?

MSC4174: webpush push kind #4174

Conversation

p1gp1g commented Aug 1, 2024 • edited Loading

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

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

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

p1gp1g commented Aug 7, 2024

p1gp1g commented Nov 21, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

MatMaul commented Dec 2, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tulir commented Jan 21, 2025

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

p1gp1g commented Aug 1, 2024 •

edited

Loading

MatMaul commented Dec 2, 2024 •

edited

Loading