LGTM3 On 11/30/22 7:19 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote:
LGTM2On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 4:17 PM Rick Byers <rby...@chromium.org> wrote: Thanks for driving the naming issue to resolution Arthur. Given the lack of engagement on the mozilla standards position issue, I don't see anything else concrete that should block shipping. I also think we could make an investment in negative sandbox flags independently if there were consensus that it was the right thing to do, but that's also a very long running debate (eg. we went over it with the introduction of feature policies and the 'allow' attribute years ago). LGTM1 On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 9:12 AM Arthur Sonzogni <arthursonzo...@google.com> wrote: On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 11:50 PM Rick Byers <rby...@chromium.org> wrote: Discussed in the API owners meeting yesterday. It sounds like work is ongoing to fully resolve issue #5 <https://github.com/WICG/anonymous-iframe/issues/5> including a good discussion at WebAppSec WG yesterday (summary in the Mozilla standards position issue <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/628>). issue #5 <https://github.com/WICG/anonymous-iframe/issues/5> has been implemented. Anonymous iframe is now renamed: iframe credentialless. The implementation is ready to ship for M110. After the webappsec meeting with Dan Veditz. I asked on this Mozilla standard position thread <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/628#issuecomment-1318940625> how we might reach agreement or what action to take instead. I don't believe we came to anything close to that. So far, I haven't had any luck getting additional responses. Arthur, let us know when you think decisions are captured sufficiently for API owners to re-evaluate. I'm not sure how to progress beyond that. So I think the API owner can now re-evaluate. Arthur @arthursonzogni On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 11:50 PM Rick Byers <rby...@chromium.org> wrote: Discussed in the API owners meeting yesterday. It sounds like work is ongoing to fully resolve issue #5 <https://github.com/WICG/anonymous-iframe/issues/5> including a good discussion at WebAppSec WG yesterday (summary in the Mozilla standards position issue <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/628>). Arthur, let us know when you think decisions are captured sufficiently for API owners to re-evaluate. Thanks, Rick On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 11:22 AM Zheng Wei <zhen...@google.com> wrote: Google Display Ads (GPT specifically) has tried the OT and is satisfied with the feature's behavior. Looking forward to it! On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 10:06:35 AM UTC-5 Smaug wrote: On 11/10/22 10:33, 'Arthur Sonzogni' via blink-dev wrote: > Hi blink-dev, > > * > * > > We decided to address issue #5 <https://github.com/WICG/anonymous-iframe/issues/5>: “rename anonymous iframe into iframe credentialless”. We will > rename <iframe anonymous>to <iframe credentialless>. > > For this adjustment to take place, the new plan is to ship in M110 instead of M109. We do not think the origin trial will need to be extended, since > partners have been or will be able to test up to M108. Therefore, there will be a gap between the original trial and launch version. > > However, renaming from anonymous to credentialless will not answer Mozilla's core argument. They believe that the feature would be best controlled via > multiple new sandbox flags. I don't think anyone from Mozilla has said that. What I have said is that the current way to control how iframes work is getting very complicated and the new attribute adds yet another mechanism. And if most of the users will use both sandbox and credentialless, understanding how those work together can be rather confusing. Also, credentialless isn't exposing the primitives itself, but some unique set of features. I'd rather see primitives to be exposed and other features built on top of them. -Olli We think it is much less ergonomic and makes the feature harder to explain to developers. The integration with sandbox > flags has challenging open questions around edge cases, as listed in this document > <https://github.com/WICG/anonymous-iframe/blob/main/mozilla-sandbox-proposal.md>. > > * > * > > Considering this, we think the current solution is a better one. We have feedback from partners that it solves their needs. Considering that we have > no clear feedback Mozilla would be interested in implementing anonymous iframes even if they were spelled as sandbox flags, we believe we should ship > with what we have implemented. > > > -- > 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+...@chromium.org > <mailto:blink-dev+...@chromium.org>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAAzos5GDYwk7ohTD4Eq2TW43hU%3DrHfXsx2V7%2BVK%3DHdKNd02-TA%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAAzos5GDYwk7ohTD4Eq2TW43hU%3DrHfXsx2V7%2BVK%3DHdKNd02-TA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAAzos5GDYwk7ohTD4Eq2TW43hU%3DrHfXsx2V7%2BVK%3DHdKNd02-TA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>>.-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the GoogleGroups "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/CAFUtAY_q53fj%2BKGD0sVBkPR8waqq9CwZzp9w9FLLwq-UryGY7w%40mail.gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY_q53fj%2BKGD0sVBkPR8waqq9CwZzp9w9FLLwq-UryGY7w%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/CAL5BFfUh3N5jRib7hVKFicubRozdMCHOcb8rOZzM0q%3DHG3ZLeg%40mail.gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfUh3N5jRib7hVKFicubRozdMCHOcb8rOZzM0q%3DHG3ZLeg%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/1905c1b7-df3e-5328-a74f-7a09839a4958%40chromium.org.
