Good catch, Eric. I just updated the Chromestatus page for CHIPS to enabled
by default on 114.

On Fri, Apr 7, 2023 at 10:33 AM Eric Lawrence <bay...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Should the change to "Enabled by default" appear for 114 on
> https://chromestatus.com/roadmap ?
>
> On Tuesday, April 4, 2023 at 4:16:05 PM UTC-5 Kaustubha Govind wrote:
>
>> CHIPS is now enabled for 100% of Chrome 110+ users. The feature is also
>> now enabled by default
>> <https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4385140> on
>> the Chromium tip-of-tree, which corresponds to the Chrome 114 release.
>>
>> On Thursday, March 30, 2023 at 9:10:50 AM UTC-4 Kaustubha Govind wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 1:24 AM Alexandru Mihai <a.m...@eyeo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Awesome, thanks for letting me know 🙂
>>>>
>>>> The rollout will cover all versions from 110 to current, not just the
>>>> latest version right?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Correct, all versions from Chrome 110 onwards are covered.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 30, 2023, at 03:49, Kaustubha Govind <kaust...@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
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 4:15 PM Dylan Cutler <dylan...@google.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 6:40 PM Dylan Cutler <dylan...@google.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 11:36 AM Dylan Cutler <dylan...@google.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1405772> 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
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2023 at 1:07 PM Dylan Cutler <dylan...@google.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 10:55 AM Rick Byers <rby...@chromium.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> LGTM3
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 5:24 AM Yoav Weiss <yoav...@chromium.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> LGTM2
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 10:43 AM Johann Hofmann <joha...@google.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 5:37 PM Chris Harrelson <chri...@chromium.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 10:34 AM 'Johann Hofmann' via blink-dev <
>>>>> blin...@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Yoav,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 5:28 AM Yoav Weiss <yoav...@chromium.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 10:57 PM 'Dylan Cutler' via blink-dev <
>>>>> blin...@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Contact emails:
>>>>>
>>>>> dylan...@google.com, kaust...@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+...@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+...@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+...@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+...@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
>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfXOZKtBQPewkukz85JZdT6OXSqLTz8%2BvUZQ6rBaY4hQ3g%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/CAMCNMFQnBSE%3DM9WCYv58Cct1J5E4035TFJ6hqKzkhPYw1U_KAA%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to