Paul HittandClaude Opus 5
7295f43a13
🔴 **There was none.** Everything you could do to a person was an inline row that unfolded under their list entry — Block, Clear chat, Remove, three text buttons in a line — with nowhere to explain what any of them did and nowhere to put a safety number. iOS has the kit's version; this is the same screen: a cover, a name plate, and a rail of actions floating at the seam between them. ⚠️ The rail carries only actions that do something. The kit's has a "personal page" icon; there is no such page here, and a fourth control that opens nothing is worse than a rail of three. ⚠️ Presence sits on the name's own line, not the plate's trailing edge. The rail floats over the right-hand third of the plate, so anything put there is behind it — a thing only visible once rendered, and it was caught on iOS the same way an hour earlier. Removing a contact confirms in place rather than in a dialog, matching the Account screen: a dialog is dismissed reflexively; a row that changes to say what it is about to do is read. 🔴 The on-device test asserted `block-$id`, `clear-$id`, `remove-$id`, which no longer exist — those actions moved off the row and are not keyed by peer id any more. Updated to follow them, plus an assertion that there is a way back, or the screen is a trap. That suite needs a device and cannot run here, so it would have failed silently until somebody next ran it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Flamenet Messenger — Android
Nothing here is an app yet. This is the engine, and it is deliberately first.
An Android client needs the protocol implemented a third time. That third
implementation is the one that finds the places where the specification says
less than the two existing engines quietly agreed on — but only if it is
written against the spec and the published vectors rather than against a
reading of our own Swift and JavaScript. So the engine comes first, it is a
plain Kotlin/JVM library with no Android in it at all, and it is held to
engine/test/vectors/protocol-v1.json — the same file the other two engines
are checked against, read from that one location rather than copied here.
./gradlew :engine:test
No Android SDK, no emulator, no device. It runs anywhere a JVM does, which is also what lets it run in CI on Linux.
What the engine covers today
| Area | Spec | State |
|---|---|---|
| Safety numbers | §7 | Done — fingerprints and conversation ordering match the published vectors |
| Key transparency verification | §19 | Done — RFC 6962 leaf/node hashing, unbalanced split, bottom-up audit paths |
| Byte helpers | — | Unsigned comparison, constant-time equality |
What it does not cover
Listed rather than left to be discovered, because a table of green ticks with the hard parts quietly missing is worse than no table:
| Area | Spec | State |
|---|---|---|
| X25519 / Ed25519 | §3 | Not started — needs a provider that works on both JVM and Android |
| X3DH key agreement | §4 | Not started |
| Double Ratchet | §6 | Not started |
| Sealed sender | §12 | Not started |
| ML-KEM-768 hybrid | §11 | Not started |
| ML-DSA-65 identities | §20 | Not started |
| Relay client | §8 | Not started |
| The app itself | — | Not started |
Until those exist, Android is honestly marked "not started" on the website, and a conversation gets the protocol's guarantees only when both ends are iOS.
Why the vectors matter more than the code
Two implementations that agree may both be wrong in the same way, especially when one was written while reading the other. The audit-path ordering in §19 is the worked example: a top-down reading of a bottom-up path produces the correct root for every left-spine index, so it passes any test that only checks index 0. The vector file pins a right-descending index for that reason, and the Kotlin tests assert both that the published path verifies and that the same path reversed does not.
If this engine ever disagrees with the file, the interesting question is which of the three is wrong — not this one by default.