Disabling *ALL* invite functions

I need that the invite copy address is disabled all the time.

I disabled the invite in the room using:


In order to avoid users to see the name of the meeting, I put jitsi into an iframe hidding the browser’s address bar.

I found the prejoin room feature very interesting, but the invite is still working in the prejoin room even if disableInviteFunctions=true.

To be coherent with the actual functionality of the prejoin room the parameter should read instead something like:
or something like that (it sound ridiculous, I know, but now is a bit misleading).

So I ask to change the functionality of disableInviteFunctions=true
to affect also the “Copy and share meeting link” on prejoin room as well.

Another solution could be achieved having two parameteres:

Otherwise the prejoin functionality is useless in my use case.

I’m afraid we don’t have a good answer for your use case. We don’t consider having the URL visible an “invite” feature per se. Would disabling the prejopin screen work for you?

Thank you @saghul. Yes, disabling prejoin screen works for me, but I will miss the feature!

@saghul, I found this in the changelog file (https://github.com/jitsi/jitsi-meet-release-notes/blob/master/CHANGELOG-WEB.md)

2.0.4966 (22-09-01)

This feature seems to be what I am looking for? Or am I misinterpreting?
If so, how can this be achieved?

Thank you!!

Ah, good catch! There seems to be a way, yes! You can override the toolbar buttons. Remove the “invite” button and that should do it. Here is the full list of buttons: https://github.com/jitsi/jitsi-meet/blob/da33d8a033f7d9e3bccddcf43d357874608b3ab8/interface_config.js#L193

I’ve already had the invite button off. This accounts for the room invite button, but not for the prejoin room.

Maybe I should try change this:
in the same file?

Well, I’ve tried and it didn’t work.
As you can see the invite is still there in the prejoin.

Curiously when I was testing the lobby/prejoin feature, the Android app “Ask to Join” dialog didn’t show anything about inviting others. (Couldn’t get a screenshot.)

Then I tried it on Windows, here’s the screenshot of the same dialog you showed:


I don’t see anything about inviting additional participants to join, though the URL of the meeting is there.

Maybe configuration options make a difference, but I’m not sure which options control the appearance of the prejoin dialog.

@jrapdx, the invite message appears on mouse over the room address.

Goes to show I learn something new every day. I never noticed it until you pointed it out, but indeed a message does appear on mouseover.

Up to now, whenever connecting as a “guest participant” I’ve always used my phone—no mouseover events on that device. In a Windows browser mouseover does cause the message to show up.

However clicking the invite message merely informs the user that the meeting link was copied to the clipboard. Since the URL was already plainly visible and easily copied, the message can’t mean much to a disruptive person intent on distributing the link to “co-conspirators”.

Besides even if the URL is sent to a bunch of potential interlopers, the “Ask to join” procedure protects the meeting. I imagine a responsible moderator wouldn’t let “outsiders” into the conference, so “sharing” from the prejoin dialog can’t be much of a threat.

In my case our site ask for credentials and hide the URL of the meeting, so it is not visible at all for participants.

It is very difficult for them to figure out the name of the room.

Those participants pay per view the meeting within a webapp. So it is not desirable for us to allow participants to be able to share the meeting for free to other people. That’s the problem.

We could add a password to the meeting, but all participantes already authenticated themselves, so having another password is not a good UX. Besides as they share the room address, they could share the room password also.

I see the problem. While conceivably there could be different ways to solve it, simplest seems to be to elide the troublesome text. One way to do that is through CSS. Just a few minutes ago I tried it in the simplest possible way, and it works, well mostly anyway.

Add the following to “body.html” in “/usr/share/jitsi-meet”:

.premeeting-screen .content .copy-meeting .copy-meeting-text,
.premeeting-screen .content .copy-meeting .url .jitsi-icon {
    display: none;

Then the lobby dialog looks like this:


As you can see, the text is elided from the rendered dialog. However it’s not really gone from the DOM just out of sight. A determined, knowledgeable client would understand it’s only necessary to right click and “inspect” the “missing” area. The developer tools shows the URL:

If it’s not an issue then the CSS should work fine. If it IS an issue the solution is more complicated re: eliminating the nodes altogether.

1 Like

This solution saved me. Yes, it is not fully secure, but waaay useful for my case!
I give you five stars @jrapdx!!!

@jrapdx, my result after putting:

.premeeting-screen .content .copy-meeting .copy-meeting-text,
.premeeting-screen .content .copy-meeting .url .jitsi-icon {
display: none;

in /usr/share/jitsi-meet/body.html is the pic below. I’ve noticed a small rounded square that still is the link to the room and clicking on it makes it turn green and copies to the clipboard the room address.
Am I making something wrong?

Thanks again!

Sorry about that. No, you’re right. On closer inspection, I realized I hadn’t seen the icon—on my screen it was black against a black background. (Yeah, I really shouldn’t be messing with CSS late at night…)

Luckily the “cure” is easy enough. Modify the CSS like this:

.premeeting-screen .content .copy-meeting {
    display: none;

Even simpler and better! And now it totally hides the whole thing.

edit: fixed a small but crucial typo (an errant ‘.’ character after ‘.copy-meeting’)

You are my hero!!!

I’ve tried and it worked fantastic, but I didn’t use the last dot:

.premeeting-screen .content .copy-meeting {
display: none;

Why it worked without the dot is beyond my understanding, but I am very very happy with the solution!

Great that it works! About that errant dot. Not sure how I included it in my reply (it’s not in the CSS I have in “body.html” on my server). Good thing you left out! The dot in that location refers to nothing, to no part of the web page, so nothing would be hidden. Omitting the dot allows selecting the part of the page you want to hide.

(I’ll edit my earlier reply…)