| Awesome, thanks for letting me know 🙂
The rollout will cover all versions from 110 to current, not just the latest version right? On Mar 30, 2023, at 03:49, Kaustubha Govind <kaustub...@google.com> wrote:
Hi Alex,
Apologies for the late response. The rollout is currently still at 10%; but we've been able to make progress on resolving metrics regressions; and intend to go to 100% either later this week, or early next week. We'll send an update here when that happens.
K
On Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 12:47:46 PM UTC-4 Alexandru Mihai wrote:
Hi @Dylan,
What's the current status of the rollout? Have you moved to 50%?
Best,
Alex M
On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 8:48:09 PM UTC+2 Dylan Cutler wrote:
Hey all,
Another update. We decided to roll out CHIPS to 10% of stable instead of 50% to get a better picture on whether CHIPS is having impacts on any of our guiding metrics before rolling out to 50%. Our plan is to let the experiment gather data for 7 days at 10% before checking metrics again and rolling out to 50%.
Thanks, Dylan
Hey all,
We were planning to ramp up CHIPS to 50% of stable this week, but upon doing metrics analysis we see some guardrail metrics have variations between our control/experiment groups. We are delaying the ramp-up a couple days to do additional analysis to make sure the variations are legitimate and/or are actually caused by partitioned cookies.
Thanks, Dylan
Hey all,
Another update for CHIPS, we will be rolling out to 5% stable starting tomorrow. Canary/beta/dev will remain enabled at 50%.
Thanks, Dylan
Hey all,
We have enabled the PartitionedCookies feature on 1% of stable. We will continue to keep the feature enabled on 50% of canary/dev/beta.
Thanks, Dylan
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 1:46:10 PM UTC-5 Dylan Cutler wrote:
Hey all,
Another quick update. Due to a partitioned cookies privacy bug that was discovered, we have to delay the launch of CHIPS to M110, which is the most recent release with the patch.
Since M110 has been released to beta, we have enabled the PartitionedCookies feature on 50% of dev/beta/canary. We will begin rolling out to 1% stable next week.
Thanks, Dylan
Hey all, quick update.
We intend to roll out the feature in gradual increments starting January 10, 2023; and expect to reach 5% of Chrome instances on January 24, 2023 and stay there for a couple of weeks. Once we are satisfied that there is no regression in metrics/behavior, we will proceed with the rollout.
LGTM3
LGTM2
Hi Yoav,
Can you expand on the plans for this I-D? Have y'all talked to the HTTPWG?
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", 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 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 with CHIPS, there have been some changes to the API:
The Partitioned attribute no longer requires 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 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, 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
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 CompatibilityFirefox: Positive
WebKit: Supported incubation, Official position pending
Web developers: Developers have indicated that CHIPS does solve for many use cases that depend on access to cookies in cross-site contexts (1, 2, 3). 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:
ErgonomicsN/A
ActivationThis 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.
SecuritySee S&P questionnaire for TAG
WebView application risksDoes 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
Flag namepartitioned-cookies
Requires code in //chrome?No
Tracking bug: https://crbug.com/1225444
Non-OSS dependenciesDoes 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 milestonesOriginTrial desktop last 106 OriginTrial desktop first 100
OriginTrial Android last 106 OriginTrial Android first 100
Anticipated spec changesOpen 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 discussionsIntent 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+...@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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfXOZKtBQPewkukz85JZdT6OXSqLTz8%2BvUZQ6rBaY4hQ3g%40mail.gmail.com.
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/070F71DF-8592-4F89-AF22-D25C1BDEF106%40eyeo.com.
|
