question-mark
Stuck on an issue?

Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.

And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.

"Error: Identity key changed" when sending a second OMEMO message

See original GitHub issue
  1. You click on “lock” icon
  2. Send message to User 1
  3. Open other browser where you have loggedin User 1
  4. You click on “lock” icon.
  5. Send message to User 0
  6. Try to send another and you got: Sorry, could not send the message due to an error. Identity key changed
  7. You logout and try again, it is the same (all the time I have unchecked This is a trusted device ) I am trying this all day and every time it is the same. I used latest libsignal-protocol.js.

So as far as i can see Omemo does not work on converse.js. Hwo to debug this to checkout why?

<bountysource-plugin>

Want to back this issue? Post a bounty on it! We accept bounties via Bountysource. </bountysource-plugin>

Issue Analytics

  • State:open
  • Created 5 years ago
  • Reactions:1
  • Comments:28 (11 by maintainers)

github_iconTop GitHub Comments

1reaction
jcbrandcommented, Dec 1, 2021

@nikita-cerejo: Ok, that sounds like a different issue. Can you please create a new issue for this? You can just copy/paste the same data from this comment into it.

Sounds to me like Converse should be fetching the OMEMO bundle for user A, but isn’t.

0reactions
nikita-cerejocommented, Dec 1, 2021

Thanks @jcbrand I am able to send encrypted messages when I changed my virtualhost domain from localhost to server.localhost. But I faced a scenario in this, which gives error that contact client doesn’t support omemo encryption. As shown in below screenshot(A).

Scenario : -> For the first time when contact is added, if user A (in my case Test 1 i.e test1@server.localhost) sent contact request to user B (in my case Test 4 i.e test4@server.localhost) and user B accepts it. -> If user B tries to send encrypted message first, it gives error that omemo encryption is not supported by user A client. -> But if user A sends encrypted message to user B first and then user B sends encrypted message then it works properly as shown in the screenshot(B). (Note : Test1 was logged in from chrome and Test 4 was logged in from microsoft edge browser)

screenshot(A) :

omemo new error

screenshot(B) :

omemo success

Read more comments on GitHub >

github_iconTop Results From Across the Web

Smack 4.4.0-beta2: OMEMO message received with unknown ...
During recent testing of OMEMO in aTalk, one of the device (Device-A) is locked into a state unable to exchange OMEMO messages with...
Read more >
XEP-0384: OMEMO Encryption - XMPP
OMEMO uses a modified version of this key agreement protocol with the following ... A second message is encrypted for the same recipient....
Read more >
Is Bob Sending Mixed Signals? - www-users.cs.umn.edu
of public keys and an identity key to the server. To send a message to Alice, Bob downloads the public key material from...
Read more >
OMEMO Encryption - Conversations.im
The encrypted payload is sent together with the headers as a <message> stanza. ... containing <key> sid The device id of the sender...
Read more >
OMEMO + Message Carbons not working with Conversations
In the opposite direction, Conversations is unable to decrypt message carbons sent by Gajim. The Conversations OMEMO key is marked as ...
Read more >

github_iconTop Related Medium Post

No results found

github_iconTop Related StackOverflow Question

No results found

github_iconTroubleshoot Live Code

Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free

github_iconTop Related Reddit Thread

No results found

github_iconTop Related Hackernoon Post

No results found

github_iconTop Related Tweet

No results found

github_iconTop Related Dev.to Post

No results found

github_iconTop Related Hashnode Post

No results found