Shoutbox

Some missing features? - Printable Version

-Shoutbox (https://shoutbox.menthix.net)
+-- Forum: MsgHelp Archive (/forumdisplay.php?fid=58)
+--- Forum: Messenger Plus! for Live Messenger (/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+---- Forum: WLM Plus! General (/forumdisplay.php?fid=23)
+----- Thread: Some missing features? (/showthread.php?tid=86362)
Some missing features? by Malekith on 10-02-2008 at 03:33 PM

Hey, i remember in the pre Windows 'Live' Messenger Plus there was the /clear slash command. It cleared the current conversation window, i was wondering if this feature will ever come back? i miss it greatly. Or is there a script i can get to do it?.

Also, will Messenger Plus ever support any type of conversation encryption? This would be an excellent feature.

Thanks in advance for any information :).

RE: Some missing features? by Spunky on 10-02-2008 at 03:41 PM

Short of closing the window and opening it again, no it is not possible...

RE: Some missing features? by Basilis on 10-02-2008 at 03:43 PM

This thread has some information about the /clear command :)
http://shoutbox.menthix.net/showthread.php?tid=84921

RE: Some missing features? by Malekith on 10-02-2008 at 03:58 PM

hmm, thanks. What about the encyption?

RE: Some missing features? by Spunky on 10-02-2008 at 04:04 PM

Unlikely.... The other use would need to have something to decrypt it so you would not be able to talk to people without MP!L and you're specific key to decode it with... =/

RE: Some missing features? by Malekith on 10-02-2008 at 04:26 PM

I remember the Pidgin predecessor having some kind of encryption that had some advanced shit to negotiate a key over a network.

EDIT:
it was called OTR, theres more info here. http://www.cypherpunks.ca/otr/

RE: Some missing features? by Spunky on 10-02-2008 at 04:56 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Malekith
I remember the Pidgin predecessor having some kind of encryption that had some advanced shit to negotiate a key over a network.

EDIT:
it was called OTR, theres more info here. http://www.cypherpunks.ca/otr/

They are not Plus' servers to be sending stuff over. Plus can only manipulate data that the client sends or receives. If it started manipulating the servers, MS would probably start charging for the bandwidth it uses.
RE: RE: Some missing features? by Malekith on 10-02-2008 at 05:22 PM

quote:
Originally posted by SpunkyLoveMuff
quote:
Originally posted by Malekith
I remember the Pidgin predecessor having some kind of encryption that had some advanced shit to negotiate a key over a network.

EDIT:
it was called OTR, theres more info here. http://www.cypherpunks.ca/otr/

They are not Plus' servers to be sending stuff over. Plus can only manipulate data that the client sends or receives. If it started manipulating the servers, MS would probably start charging for the bandwidth it uses.

Lol, thats ridiculous and makes no sense. Is MS everyone ISP now? And i'm also pretty sure this doesnt use any external servers, its just client to client.
RE: Some missing features? by Menthix on 10-02-2008 at 05:48 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Malekith
Is MS everyone ISP now? And i'm also pretty sure this doesnt use any external servers, its just client to client.
As far as i know current versions of Messenger do indeed use a direct connection for conversations in most situations. But when no direct connection van be made due to network issues or firewalls it falls back to going trough Microsoft's servers. So you can't rely on Messenger to make a direct connection every time.

Also, Patchou said multiple times in the past he doesn't want Messenger Plus! to mess on a protocol level. Some type of encryption is still possible, but I don't see a secure tunnel happening.

RE: RE: Some missing features? by Malekith on 10-02-2008 at 05:51 PM

quote:
Originally posted by MenthiX
quote:
Originally posted by Malekith
Is MS everyone ISP now? And i'm also pretty sure this doesnt use any external servers, its just client to client.
As far as i know current versions of Messenger do indeed use a direct connection for conversations in most situations. But when no direct connection van be made due to network issues or firewalls it falls back to going trough Microsoft's servers. So you can't rely on Messenger to make a direct connection every time.

Also, Patchou said multiple times in the past he doesn't want Messenger Plus! to mess on a protocol level. Some type of encryption is still possible, but I don't see a secure tunnel happening.


I think you misunderstood, i was talking about the encryption protocol negotiation being direct connection not the conversations. And your wrong anyway, conversations ALWAYS go through MS's servers.
RE: Some missing features? by Menthix on 10-02-2008 at 05:56 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Malekith
conversations ALWAYS go through MS's servers
Hmm, okay, somebody told me different. Haven't looked at it myself for a long time.
RE: RE: Some missing features? by pollolibredegrasa on 10-02-2008 at 06:12 PM

Encryption has been discussed a few times but it seems very unlikely that it will be added to Plus. This thread maybe of some interest, particularly the posts by CookieRevised.

quote:
Originally posted by MenthiX
quote:
Originally posted by Malekith
conversations ALWAYS go through MS's servers
Hmm, okay, somebody told me different. Haven't looked at it myself for a long time.
There is an option under Security in WLM's options that says something along the lines of "Allow me to connect directly to contacts when sending messages" - could this be what they were referring to?
RE: Some missing features? by Spunky on 10-02-2008 at 07:18 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Malekith

Lol, thats ridiculous and makes no sense. Is MS everyone ISP now? And i'm also pretty sure this doesnt use any external servers, its just client to client.

I don't see how it's ridiculous... Anything sent from the client to the servers has a set structure. If it is not a message the server understands you are disconnected instantly (usually without an error message). Even with direct connections, how can you be sure that the other person has MP!L? You couldn't even be certain the were using WLM at all, it could be a web messenger, or multi-protocol client for example.

I've done a lot of reading of protocol messages and have made a bot that connects. If something isn't right when you send it, you get logged off. Simple.

You also have to consider the length of the messages that encryption would cause. A good encryption could increase the length of the message quite a bit, causing it to be truncated when it reaches the servers, meaning it can not be decrypted at the other end properly.

Please do not tell me that it's ridiculous just because it is past your understanding. I don't understand what light is made up of, but I know it exists ^o)

@Menthix: I haven't ever seen any evidence to say messages can be sent via a direct connection, however they may be CAPABLE of it.

@Pollolibredegrasa: I think that may just disable all the p2p fucntions such as the sending of DPs and backgrounds (maybe file transfer)... Without looking too much into, I wouldn't be able to say for definate.

Now, I'm not trying to come across as a know-it-all and by no means have a full understanding of the protocol (only WLM employees do). This is all just what I've come to understand from working with the protocol myself