[aerogear-dev] Push message encryption to support PushMessageData of Push API

[Idel Pivnitskiy]

>
> perhaps break it down, on the server into two different sending processes
> ?
> native send (curernt)
> wrbpush send ?
>
> where we would have a WebPushSender API ?
>

Hard to talk about separate unique API for WebPush right now, when here is
just two implementations (FCM and MPS) and both of them have not
implemented WebPush protocol yet. Think that temporal experimental solution
may be enough now. Let's see what can I do today-tomorrow to allow sending
push notifications to both (FCM and MPS) providers for WebPush variant [1].

[1]
https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/pull/745#discussion_r72153644

Best regards,
Idel Pivnitskiy
--
Twitter: @idelpivnitskiy <https://twitter.com/idelpivnitskiy>
GitHub: @idelpivnitskiy <https://github.com/idelpivnitskiy>

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>
wrote:

> perhaps break it down, on the server into two different sending processes
> ?
> native send (curernt)
> wrbpush send ?
>
> where we would have a WebPushSender API ?
>
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> hrm, not sure I am that happy about these requirements :)
>>
>> I guess we also need to change our data access layer to not just return
>> tokens, but a more complex object, containing token, key and secret  - hrm
>> :)
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 3:19 AM, Idel Pivnitskiy <
>> idel.pivnitskiy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> As we discussed previously, Firefox already supports sending push
>>> message data to browser if it will be encrypted. Since version 50, Google
>>> Chrome also support it [1]. But it requires for UPS to store "public key"
>>> and "auth secret" for each Installation [2]. See current example of sending
>>> push notifications with a payload[3].
>>>
>>> Storing of two additional fields is not a big deal. But we also have to
>>> refactor PushNotificationSender [4], because it consumes a collection of
>>> device tokens as a param instead of a collection of installations.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts about how we can implement it with minimal changes?
>>>
>>> [1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/PushMessageData
>>> [2]
>>> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/model/api/src/main/java/org/jboss/aerogear/unifiedpush/api/Installation.java
>>> [3] https://serviceworke.rs/push-payload_index_doc.html
>>> [4]
>>> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/push/sender/src/main/java/org/jboss/aerogear/unifiedpush/message/sender/PushNotificationSender.java
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Idel Pivnitskiy
>>> --
>>> Twitter: @idelpivnitskiy <https://twitter.com/idelpivnitskiy>
>>> GitHub: @idelpivnitskiy <https://github.com/idelpivnitskiy>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20160726/b3fbcaa8/attachment-0001.html