On the 10th of February, Telegram sent the following message to
those with an application registered on https://my.telegram.org.
--
Telegram API Update. Hello [REDACTED]. Thank you for contributing to the
open Telegram ecosystem by developing your app, [REDACTED].
Please note that due to recent updates to Telegram's handling of SMS and
the integration of new SMS providers like Firebase, we are changing the
way login codes are handled in third-party apps based on the Telegram API.
Starting on 18.02.2023, users logging into third-party apps will only be
able to receive login codes via Telegram. It will no longer be possible
to request an SMS to log into your app - just like when logging into
Telegram's own desktop and web clients.
Exactly like with the Telegram Desktop and Web apps, if a user doesn't
have a Telegram account yet, they will need to create one first using
an official mobile Telegram app.
We kindly ask you to update your app's login and signup interfaces to
reflect these changes before they go live on 18.02.2023 at 13:00 UTC.
This change will not significantly affect users since, according to our
research, the vast majority of third-party app users also use official
Telegram apps. In the coming months, we expect to offer new tools for
third-party developers that will help streamline the login process.
Raw API does not monkey-patch the client on the returned messages,
so the get_input_chat call would return None, causing the forward
to fail. Instead, manually resolve the chat using the message's
peer_id.
The resolve call can also be avoided if from_peer is passed (which
may mismatch with where the messages actually belong, but that's not
really a concern).
When a bot account sends a message, deletes it, and sends a new one,
very reliably it would detect a gap, and as a result recover the
second message it sent, processing it itself (because the hack with
`_self_outgoing` cannot possibly work when catching up).
Now certain `rpc_result` are also processed as-if they were updates
(including the ones from deleting messages), which solves this gap
issue. Not entirely sure if it's a hack or the intended way to do it
(since Telegram *does* return proper `updates` for other RPCs), but
it seems to solve this particular problem.
Other requests such as reading history, mentions or reactions also
return an instance of this type, but the `pts_count` should be 0,
and at worst it should simply trigger a gap, which shouldn't be a
big deal.
Because Telegram can't actually use 0 for the pts, it uses 1, even
if the count is 0. This forces the next update to use 2, or else it
could not be fetched when using an offset of 1 (despite the count
being 0 on the first update, which should not have bumped the second
update to use 2).
This caused Telethon to create an initial state of 0 for the new entry
(and also "incorrectly" detected following updates as gaps, which
would quickly trigger the call to get difference with a bad pts).
Now Telethon is aware of this special-case and will not initialize
state as 0, even if that's not the "correct" thing to do.
These will log sensitive information.
They are disabled when running with PYTHONOPTIMIZED.
They can only be enabled by setting a level lower than DEBUG,
which is difficult to do on accident.
Closes#3936.
There are two changes made to ensure the first update in a channel
cannot be lost, first by always sorting updates before applying pts,
and second by cautiously initializing the local pts if the client
had no pts known beforehand.
It might be possible to cleanup the handling of possible gaps now
that updates are always sorted, but that requires more thought.
