I don’t think it is a good idea, it doesn’t matter much it is not backwards compatible, people can always upgrade if they want to see the name, storing a name there will be leaking a name forever even after name changes etc. besides over-complicating implementation for something that is bound to become useless
It’s a good point against embedding the fingerprint in the message itself (which is not needed to get the notifs for mentions)
No, it’s the other way around. The fingerprint of a profile won’t change, while the display name and the email address can be changed back and forth any time. Hence, embedding the fingerprint according to my suggestion would be a stable reference to the given person.
You could use name+“relative id” in the message text and put “relative id to fngerprint” mapping in the encrypted message headers, there it can then easily be removed on forwarding without parsing the text.
Really feeling the weight of this issue. It’s not much better than an SMS text group if it doesn’t have mentions.
It talks about signing someone’s keys several times in the article.
- Web of Trust: After verifying a key in person, sign it with your key to publicly vouch for the association.
And yet for delta chat, there is no benefit to scanning a QR in person vs just tapping a link. I know someone can fake a QR scan, but for the user’s own benefit, they should have a better guarantee from a QR in person than a link, right?
But you lose all your contacts then. Those relationships are valuable right? I had a friend get a new phone and he lost everything. Really annoying and made him hate delta chat. For an app that values “zero configuration” and “don’t make them worry about the technical stuff”, this is a big failure.
You should regularly create at least a tiny backup of your ID to maintain your contacts:
You may also export import contacts as vcard files as a much more laborious process.