LGTM2 On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 10:43 AM Johann Hofmann <johann...@google.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 5:37 PM Chris Harrelson <chris...@chromium.org> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 10:34 AM 'Johann Hofmann' via blink-dev < >> blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi Yoav, >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 5:28 AM Yoav Weiss <yoavwe...@chromium.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 10:57 PM 'Dylan Cutler' via blink-dev < >>>> blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Contact emails: >>>>> >>>>> dylancut...@google.com, kaustub...@google.com >>>>> >>>>> Proposal repository: >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/privacycg/CHIPS >>>>> >>>>> Design doc: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wL2lCXpaVOi0cWOn_ehfLFIZQxT3t0SH-ANnZYPEB0I/edit?usp=sharing >>>>> >>>>> Specification: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cutler-httpbis-partitioned-cookies/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> Can you expand on the plans for this I-D? Have y'all talked to the >>>> HTTPWG? >>>> >>> >>> Yes, this is being discussed in HTTPWG. Dylan presented CHIPS at IETF >>> 115, minutes are here: >>> https://httpwg.org/wg-materials/ietf115/minutes.html#cookies >>> >> >> Great. Were there any concerns raised there that might create a risk for >> CHIPS? >> > > Not as far as I'm aware of. I couldn't attend the meeting in person, but > revisited it with the team. From what I was told the main discussion point > was whether we shouldn't just partition all 3P cookies by default instead > of giving developers the ability to decide. It's a valid question, but one > that has been extensively discussed between browser vendors in Privacy CG, > and both Safari and Chrome have made it clear that they strongly prefer > blocking 3P cookies by default (with Firefox not being opposed to that). > We'll of course keep on engaging with these concerns and questions in > HTTPWG, but it seems like a decision that ultimately browsers should have > the most authority on. > > In any case, I don't think that this discussion presents any compat risk > for CHIPS, as the Partitioned attribute would be compatible with a > hypothetical partition-by-default future (i.e. by being a no-op). > Thanks for the details! :) > > >> >>> One important thing to note is that the HTML/Fetch <-> Cookies spec >>> interfaces aren't well defined at the moment, which also affects other >>> specs that deal with cookie changes such as the Storage Access API. We're >>> working on fixing this in a larger effort called "cookie layering" >>> <https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/2084>, which is >>> intended to give Fetch some more responsibility in providing the >>> information that is used to select cookies from the cookie store. This way >>> we can actually access concepts like "top-level site" at the right >>> implementation layer. So, in the mid-term, parts of CHIPS will likely end >>> up back in HTML and Fetch. >>> >>> In the meantime, like for SameSite, the RFC will hand-wave some of the >>> browser bits. >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> Summary: >>>>> >>>>> Given that Chrome plans to deprecate unpartitioned third-party >>>>> cookies, we want to give developers the ability to use cookies in >>>>> cross-site contexts that are partitioned by top-level site to meet use >>>>> cases >>>>> <https://developer.chrome.com/en/docs/privacy-sandbox/chips/#use-cases> >>>>> that don't track users cross-site (e.g. SaaS embeds, headless CMS, sandbox >>>>> domains, etc.). Chrome will introduce a mechanism to opt into having >>>>> third-party cookies partitioned by top-level site using a new cookie >>>>> attribute, Partitioned. >>>>> >>>>> Since we announced our Intent to Experiment >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/_dJFNJpf91U/m/OXzFi_6wAwAJ?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> with CHIPS, there have been some changes to the API: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - >>>>> >>>>> The Partitioned attribute no longer requires >>>>> <https://github.com/privacycg/CHIPS/pull/46> the __Host- prefix or >>>>> its required attributes. The Secure requirement remains. >>>>> - >>>>> >>>>> We are changing the per-partition-per-domain limit to be based on >>>>> the total size (in bytes) of the cookies set by a domain in a >>>>> particular >>>>> partition in addition to the number of cookies. We intend >>>>> <https://github.com/privacycg/CHIPS/issues/48#issuecomment-1264126065> >>>>> to impose a limit of 10 KB per-embedded-site, per-top-level-site and >>>>> increase the numeric limit from 10 to 180. >>>>> - >>>>> >>>>> For sites embedded in top-level domains that are in a First-Party >>>>> Set <https://github.com/WICG/first-party-sets>, their cookies' >>>>> partition key will no longer be the owner domain of that set. Rather, >>>>> the >>>>> partition key will always be the top-level domain that the cookie was >>>>> created on. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Blink component: >>>>> >>>>> Internals>Network>Cookies >>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Internals%3ENetwork%3ECookies> >>>>> >>>>> TAG review: >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/654 (Supportive early >>>>> review) >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/779 (Oct 19 >>>>> specification review) >>>>> >>>>> Risks >>>>> >>>>> Interoperability and Compatibility >>>>> >>>>> Firefox: Positive >>>>> <https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/#chips> >>>>> >>>>> WebKit: Supported incubation >>>>> <https://github.com/privacycg/proposals/issues/30#issuecomment-1113257336>, >>>>> Official position pending >>>>> <https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/50> >>>>> >>>>> Web developers: Developers have indicated that CHIPS does solve for >>>>> many use cases that depend on access to cookies in cross-site contexts ( >>>>> 1 <https://github.com/privacycg/CHIPS/issues/8>, 2 >>>>> <https://github.com/privacycg/CHIPS/issues/30#issuecomment-1104225686>, >>>>> 3 >>>>> <https://triplelift.com/privacy-hub/w3c-proposals-explained-privacy-with-a-side-of-chips/>). >>>>> Through incubation, and the Origin Trial, we received feedback to improve >>>>> ease-of-use, particularly to allow for easier migration of existing >>>>> systems >>>>> to use CHIPS. We believe we have satisfactorily resolved these concerns >>>>> (see changes made listed under Summary section). >>>>> >>>>> Other signals: >>>>> >>>>> Ergonomics >>>>> >>>>> N/A >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Activation >>>>> >>>>> This feature introduces a new cookie attribute, Partitioned, which is >>>>> opt-in only. Sites which do not set their cookies with Partitioned should >>>>> not see any change in the browser's behavior when we ship. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Security >>>>> >>>>> See S&P questionnaire for TAG >>>>> <https://github.com/privacycg/CHIPS/blob/main/TAG-S%26P-questionnaire.md> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> WebView application risks >>>>> >>>>> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such >>>>> that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? >>>>> >>>>> This feature does not deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs. >>>>> This feature is behind a killswitch. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, >>>>> Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)? >>>>> >>>>> Yes >>>>> >>>>> Is this feature covered by web platform tests? >>>>> >>>>> Yes >>>>> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/tree/master/cookies/partitioned-cookies> >>>>> >>>>> Flag name >>>>> >>>>> partitioned-cookies >>>>> >>>>> Requires code in //chrome? >>>>> >>>>> No >>>>> >>>>> Tracking bug: >>>>> >>>>> https://crbug.com/1225444 >>>>> >>>>> Non-OSS dependencies >>>>> >>>>> Does the feature depend on any code or APIs outside the Chromium open >>>>> source repository and its open-source dependencies to function? >>>>> >>>>> Not anymore than cookies already do now. >>>>> >>>>> Estimated milestones >>>>> >>>>> OriginTrial desktop last >>>>> >>>>> 106 >>>>> >>>>> OriginTrial desktop first >>>>> >>>>> 100 >>>>> >>>>> OriginTrial Android last >>>>> >>>>> 106 >>>>> >>>>> OriginTrial Android first >>>>> >>>>> 100 >>>>> >>>>> Anticipated spec changes >>>>> >>>>> Open questions about a feature may be a source of future web compat or >>>>> interop issues. Please list open issues (e.g. links to known github issues >>>>> in the project for the feature specification) whose resolution may >>>>> introduce web compat/interop risk (e.g., changing to naming or structure >>>>> of >>>>> the API in a non-backward-compatible way). >>>>> >>>>> List of open issues: https://github.com/privacycg/CHIPS/issues >>>>> >>>>> Chrome Platform Status page: >>>>> >>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5179189105786880 >>>>> >>>>> Links to previous Intent discussions >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Prototype: >>>>> >>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/hvMJ33kqHRo/ >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Experiment: >>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/_dJFNJpf91U/m/YqP09XbbAgAJ >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Extend Experiment: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/kZRtetS8jsY/m/ppK4kDbqAwAJ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/MKQODOL0Fso/m/nZXI2dqwAQAJ >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAMCNMFTt9hEnH1%2BBzB6c0qQijbBEJwvUKPKSO2gu7E-A%2BY_v8w%40mail.gmail.com >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAMCNMFTt9hEnH1%2BBzB6c0qQijbBEJwvUKPKSO2gu7E-A%2BY_v8w%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfUDzq6pUpw_%2BGMBxzrsb23qtw5Vnv-QG6yZQ35G_j%2BZfQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfUDzq6pUpw_%2BGMBxzrsb23qtw5Vnv-QG6yZQ35G_j%2BZfQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAD_OO4gVfT1aAHE4%3D3Cs6KoCA54q14bGaPepuqofdTEKJVkkgw%40mail.gmail.com >>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAD_OO4gVfT1aAHE4%3D3Cs6KoCA54q14bGaPepuqofdTEKJVkkgw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfXOZKtBQPewkukz85JZdT6OXSqLTz8%2BvUZQ6rBaY4hQ3g%40mail.gmail.com.
