starred/sms-backup-plus-jberkel
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/jberkel/sms-backup-plus.git synced 2026-04-25 17:05:59 +03:00
Code Issues 181 Projects Releases 10 Packages Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #1060] backing up to SMS folder in gmail does not show the correct names #847

New issue
Open
opened 2026-02-26 01:32:06 +03:00 by kerem · 12 comments
kerem commented 2026-02-26 01:32:06 +03:00
Owner
Copy link

Originally created by @thinkscriptfan on GitHub (Apr 27, 2021).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/jberkel/sms-backup-plus/issues/1060

Originally assigned to: @jberkel, @kurahaupo on GitHub.

Hi , I am using smsbackup+ on pixel 3axl , latest android .
recently , I have noticed that sometimes my text to some known contacts is not backed up correctly .
instead of showing from me , it shows from +1xxxxxxx +1xxxxxxx@unknown.email , and instead of showing SMS with the name of the receiver , it shows SMS with +1xxxxxxx
( where +1xxxxxxx is my cell number )

I just noticed that this has been happening only in the last 2 years,

This is very serious , as the conversation threads can not be valid anymore under a certain name.

Expected behaviour from me SMS with " the name of the receiver"

Actual behaviour from +1xxxxxxx +1xxxxxxx@unknown.email SMS with +1xxxxxxx

Steps to reproduce the behaviour ? sometimes happens , not sure how to reproduce.

Please specify the following:

  • Android version 11
  • Phone model / brand pixel 3a xl
  • SMS Backup+ version installed version 1.5.11
  • Messaging app google message app version 7.7.050 (Neem_RC02.phone_dynamic) (SPAM protection ON)
Originally created by @thinkscriptfan on GitHub (Apr 27, 2021). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/jberkel/sms-backup-plus/issues/1060 Originally assigned to: @jberkel, @kurahaupo on GitHub. Hi , I am using smsbackup+ on pixel 3axl , latest android . recently , I have noticed that sometimes my text to some known contacts is not backed up correctly . instead of showing from me , it shows from +1xxxxxxx <+1xxxxxxx@unknown.email> , and instead of showing SMS with the name of the receiver , it shows SMS with +1xxxxxxx ( where +1xxxxxxx is my cell number ) I just noticed that this has been happening only in the last 2 years, This is very serious , as the conversation threads can not be valid anymore under a certain name. ### Expected behaviour from me SMS with " the name of the receiver" ### Actual behaviour from +1xxxxxxx <+1xxxxxxx@unknown.email> SMS with +1xxxxxxx ### Steps to reproduce the behaviour ? sometimes happens , not sure how to reproduce. ### Please specify the following: * Android version 11 * Phone model / brand pixel 3a xl * SMS Backup+ version installed version 1.5.11 * Messaging app google message app version 7.7.050 (Neem_RC02.phone_dynamic) (SPAM protection ON)
kerem commented 2026-02-26 01:32:06 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021):

I'm pretty sure this is a continuation of a known issue. I will check for related issues shortly.

Essentially, the API used to access an individual message presents a list of addresses (phone numbers) associated with it, in no particular order.

When this app was written they were presented with the "sender" as the first address, but at some point the order became randomized, and a "type" tag was added. This is why you see your own address appearing instead of the other party's.

<!-- gh-comment-id:850911016 --> @kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021): I'm pretty sure this is a continuation of a known issue. I will check for related issues shortly. Essentially, the API used to access an individual message presents a list of addresses (phone numbers) associated with it, in no particular order. When this app was written they were presented with the "sender" as the first address, but at some point the order became randomized, and a "type" tag was added. This is why you see your own address appearing instead of the other party's.
kerem commented 2026-02-26 01:32:06 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021):

@jberkel - I'd like your thoughts on this plan:

What needs to happen is to inspect the "type" tag on each address to find which one is the sender and then to choose based on incoming or outgoing whether the sender is the "other party" or not.

In the case of group messages it gets more complicated, as for incoming messages it would need to identify which of the recipients are "self" and which are "others". Possibly this could be learned from the 2-party messages.

If that can't be made to work reliably, then there are several options:

  1. save a separate copy for each participant
  2. include all the participants in one message, including the local user's address. They might need to be sorted & hashed into a single "address"; that will depend on conversation works in detail.
<!-- gh-comment-id:850911023 --> @kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021): @jberkel - I'd like your thoughts on this plan: What needs to happen is to inspect the "type" tag on each address to find which one is the sender and then to choose based on incoming or outgoing whether the sender is the "other party" or not. In the case of group messages it gets more complicated, as for incoming messages it would need to identify which of the recipients are "self" and which are "others". Possibly this could be learned from the 2-party messages. If that can't be made to work reliably, then there are several options: 1. save a separate copy for each participant 2. include all the participants in one message, including the local user's address. They might need to be sorted & hashed into a single "address"; that will depend on conversation works in detail.
kerem commented 2026-02-26 01:32:06 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021):

Duplicate of #390

<!-- gh-comment-id:850911495 --> @kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021): Duplicate of #390
kerem commented 2026-02-26 01:32:06 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021):

Possibly related to #621

<!-- gh-comment-id:850911751 --> @kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021): Possibly related to #621
kerem commented 2026-02-26 01:32:06 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021):

Possibly related to #671

<!-- gh-comment-id:850911911 --> @kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021): Possibly related to #671
kerem commented 2026-02-26 01:32:06 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021):

Possibly related to #704

<!-- gh-comment-id:850911993 --> @kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021): Possibly related to #704
kerem commented 2026-02-26 01:32:06 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021):

Possibly related to #621

<!-- gh-comment-id:850912335 --> @kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021): Possibly related to #621
kerem commented 2026-02-26 01:32:06 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021):

Possibly related to #663

<!-- gh-comment-id:850912505 --> @kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021): Possibly related to #663
kerem commented 2026-02-26 01:32:06 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021):

Duplicate of #676

<!-- gh-comment-id:850912553 --> @kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 29, 2021): Duplicate of #676
kerem commented 2026-02-26 01:32:06 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 30, 2021):

See new bug classification misattribution

<!-- gh-comment-id:850917485 --> @kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 30, 2021): See new bug classification [misattribution](/jberkel/sms-backup-plus/labels/misattribution)
kerem commented 2026-02-26 01:32:06 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 30, 2021):

See additional classification half-missing, as some of the issues with that tag may be hidden variants on the misattribution tag.

<!-- gh-comment-id:850917867 --> @kurahaupo commented on GitHub (May 30, 2021): See additional classification [half-missing](/jberkel/sms-backup-plus/labels/half-missing), as _some_ of the issues with that tag may be hidden variants on the misattribution tag.
kerem commented 2026-02-26 01:32:06 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@kurahaupo commented on GitHub (Jun 2, 2021):

@jberkel FYI need to make allowance that some MMS messages include the sender among the recipients as well

<!-- gh-comment-id:852696494 --> @kurahaupo commented on GitHub (Jun 2, 2021): @jberkel FYI need to make allowance that some MMS messages include the sender among the recipients as well
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag specified
Branches Tags
master
cyber1000-docker
multisim
update-build-process
gh-pages
jcrben-patch-1
workmanager
jcrben-patch-2
old-sms-backup
1.6.0-BETA2
1.6.0-BETA1
1.5.11
1.5.11-BETA22
1.5.11-BETA21
1.5.11-BETA20
1.5.11-BETA19
1.5.11-BETA18
1.5.11-BETA17
1.5.11-BETA16
1.5.11-BETA15
1.5.11-BETA14
1.5.11-BETA13
1.5.11-BETA12
1.5.11-BETA11
1.5.11-BETA10
1.5.11-BETA9
1.5.11-BETA8
1.5.11-BETA7
1.5.11-BETA6
1.5.11-BETA5
1.5.11-BETA4
1.5.11-BETA3
1.5.11-BETA2
1.5.11-BETA1
1.5.10
1.5.10-BETA1
1.5.9
1.5.9-BETA6
1.5.9-BETA5
1.5.9-BETA4
1.5.9-BETA3
1.5.9-BETA2
1.5.9-BETA1
1.5.8
1.5.8-BETA2
1.5.8-BETA1
1.5.7
1.5.7-BETA2
1.5.7-BETA1
1.5.6-DEBUG
1.5.6
1.5.6-RC1
1.5.6-BETA11
1.5.6-BETA10
1.5.6-BETA9
1.5.6-BETA8
1.5.6-BETA7
1.5.6-BETA6
1.5.6-BETA5
1.5.6-BETA4
1.5.6-BETA3
1.5.6-BETA2
1.5.6-BETA1
1.5.5
1.5.5-BETA2
1.5.5-BETA1
1.5.4
1.5.4-BETA2
1.5.4-BETA1
1.5.3
1.5.2
1.5.1
1.5.0
1.4.8
1.4.7
1.4.6
1.4.5
1.4.4
1.4.3
1.4.2
1.4.1
1.4.0
1.3.7
1.3.6
1.3.5
1.3.4
1.3.3
1.3.1
1.3.2
1.3
1.2
1.1.5
1.1.4
1.1.3
1.1.2
1.1.1
1.1
1.0.11
1.0.10
1.0.9
1.0.8
1.0.7
1.0.6
1.0.5
1.0.4
1.0.3
1.0.2
1.0.1
1.0
Labels
Clear labels   
AM+RCS

   
FAQ

   
awaiting response

   
backup

   
bespoke

   
bug

   
calendar

   
call log

   
cannot reproduce

   
cloudless

   
device-specific

   
documentation

   
dual- & multi-SIM

   
duplicate

   
feature-request

   
fixed in beta

   
good first issue

   
half-missing

   
help wanted

   
helpful

   
meta

   
misattribution

   
mms

   
other message sources

   
pull-request

Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request

  
question

   
rejuvenation

   
restore

   
schedule

   
security

   
stale

   
task

   
thanks

   
v1.5.1

   
v1.5.10

   
v1.5.11

   
v1.5.2

   
v1.5.3

   
v1.5.3

   
v1.5.4

   
v1.5.4

   
v1.5.5

   
v1.5.5

   
v1.5.6

   
v1.5.7

   
v1.5.8

   
v1.5.9

   
v1.6β

   
xoauth

   
~$ bounty $~
No labels
AM+RCS
FAQ
awaiting response
backup
bespoke
bug
calendar
call log
cannot reproduce
cloudless
device-specific
documentation
dual- & multi-SIM
duplicate
feature-request
fixed in beta
good first issue
half-missing
help wanted
helpful
meta
misattribution
mms
other message sources
pull-request
question
rejuvenation
restore
schedule
security
stale
task
thanks
v1.5.1
v1.5.10
v1.5.11
v1.5.2
v1.5.3
v1.5.3
v1.5.4
v1.5.4
v1.5.5
v1.5.5
v1.5.6
v1.5.7
v1.5.8
v1.5.9
v1.6β
xoauth
~$ bounty $~
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
starred/sms-backup-plus-jberkel#847
No description provided.