> > Can I ask why string literal vs boolean?
I had done this to match the convention already being used for other Protected Audience-related response headers (such as Ad-Auction-Allowed/X-Allow-FLEDGE <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:content/services/auction_worklet/public/cpp/auction_downloader.cc;l=413-429;drc=b8ddddd3dfef89a597a4e89d8cc76bcf8a15d655>). At the time of implementation, I wasn't aware of the preferred boolean convention of "?0" and "?1" defined in RFC8941 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8941#name-booleans>. Even though this isn't what's preferred, I think it should still be fine to keep in place for now, and being consistent with the rest of the Protected Audience API is always a plus. On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 12:19 PM Mike Taylor <miketa...@chromium.org> wrote: > On 5/9/24 12:13 PM, Liam Brady wrote: > > Can you clarify what the type is for this new header? It reads as if >> you're adding a String Item that looks like a boolean, rather than a >> Boolean Item. Is that correct? It doesn't seem to be actually defined in >> the spec. > > > This is meant to be a string literal that is either "true" or "false". I > have a spec PR <https://github.com/WICG/fenced-frame/pull/159> up to > formally define that and remove any confusion over what values it's > expecting. Thanks for calling this out! > > Can I ask why string literal vs boolean? > > > This change would impact the ability of first parties to regulate and >> prevent reportEvent beacons. Although this requires mutual opt-in, I expect >> scenarios to eventually come up where a site owner wants to allow >> cross-origin reportEvent only for certain origins. > > > To clarify the first party piece, control over sending reportEvent() > beacons rests within the worklet owner that invokes > registerAdBeacon()/registerAdMacro() i.e. seller/ buyer and the document > loaded with the main ad renderURL (i.e. the buyer/advertisers). The > first-party (i.e. the publishers) don't have control over reportEvent() > beacons since that is considered part of the overall Protected Audience > API, and this feature doesn't change that. > > On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 1:27 PM Mike Taylor <miketa...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> On 5/8/24 11:30 AM, 'Liam Brady' via blink-dev wrote: >> >> Contact emails >> >> lbr...@google.com, shivani...@chromium.org, jkar...@chromium.org >> >> Explainer(s) >> >> https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/1134 >> >> Spec(s) >> >> https://github.com/WICG/fenced-frame/pull/152 >> >> Summary >> >> Ad frames (both fenced frames and urn-iframes) created through a >> Protected Audience auction, as well as their same-origin nested iframes, >> are allowed to call reportEvent() API >> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/Fenced_Frames_Ads_Reporting.md#reportevent-preregistered-destination-url> >> to send event-level reports. It's also important for third-parties on >> Protected Audience-created ads to have the same measurement and reporting >> capabilities for spam detection, brand safety, and measurement >> verification. However, the API as it exists currently has a same-origin >> child iframe restriction which poses a complication as described below. >> >> If an ad buyer wins an ad auction and its ad frame is displayed on a >> page, it might choose to embed a subframe that points to a third-party >> server that hosts the actual ad instead. With this use case, and with the >> current state of the reportEvent() API, the actual ad's document cannot >> directly call reportEvent() the way that its embedder can since the >> document is in a cross-origin nested iframe. Instead, it has to get its >> embedder to actually send the beacon by letting the embedder know via a >> postMessage. This will not be an ergonomic solution for this use case. >> >> With this change, a cross-origin subframe can opt in to sending >> reportEvent() beacons using its ancestor's reporting metadata by calling >> reportEvent() with the parameter crossOriginExposed=true. This is the same >> syntax as is currently used by the main render URL frame to opt in to >> sending cross-origin automatic beacons with data (this means the FenceEvent >> IDL will stay the same). >> >> The main ad render URL frame will opt in with a new >> "Allow-Cross-Origin-Event-Reporting" response header. Its valid values will >> be true and false, and will default to false when omitted. This will not be >> required for documents that are same-origin to the FencedFrameConfig's >> mapped url. >> >> Can you clarify what the type is for this new header? It reads as if >> you're adding a String Item that looks like a boolean, rather than a >> Boolean Item. Is that correct? It doesn't seem to be actually defined in >> the spec. >> >> (I filed https://github.com/WICG/fenced-frame/issues/158 for that.) >> >> >> This is a convenience change (not privacy impacting), as it's already >> possible (but cumbersome) for the third-party to postMessage the parent >> frame to send the report on their behalf. For security reasons, the >> proposal requires opt-ins from both the main ad frame and the cross-origin >> iframe. >> >> Blink component >> >> Blink>FencedFrames >> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EFencedFrames> >> >> TAG reviews and status >> >> Fenced frames existing TAG review appended with these spec changes >> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/838# >> <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/838#issuecomment-1792881253> >> >> Link to Origin Trial feedback summary >> >> No Origin Trial performed >> >> Is this feature supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, >> Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)? >> >> Supported on all the above platforms except Android WebView. >> >> Debuggability >> >> Additional debugging capabilities are not necessary for these feature >> changes. >> >> Risks >> >> Compatibility >> >> This is an added functionality and is backward compatible. >> >> Interoperability >> >> There are no interoperability risks as no other browsers have decided to >> implement these features yet. We have not received any standards positions >> from Mozilla <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/781> >> or Webkit <https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/173>. >> >> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>? >> Link to test suite results from wpt.fyi. >> >> Yes. New reportEvent() beacon tests have been added to test cross-origin >> beacons. >> >> fence-report-event-cross-origin-content-initiated.https.html (test >> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-content-initiated.https.html>) >> (results >> <https://wpt.fyi/results/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-content-initiated.https.html> >> ) >> >> fence-report-event-cross-origin-nested-urn-iframe.https.html (test >> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-nested-urn-iframe.https.html>) >> (results >> <https://wpt.fyi/results/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-nested-urn-iframe.https.html> >> ) >> >> fence-report-event-cross-origin-nested.https.html (test >> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-nested.https.html>) >> (results >> <https://wpt.fyi/results/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-nested.https.html> >> ) >> >> fence-report-event-cross-origin-no-embedder-opt-in.https.html (test >> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-no-embedder-opt-in.https.html>) >> (results >> <https://wpt.fyi/results/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-no-embedder-opt-in.https.html> >> ) >> >> fence-report-event-cross-origin-no-subframe-opt-in.https.html (test >> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-no-subframe-opt-in.https.html>) >> (results >> <https://wpt.fyi/results/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-no-subframe-opt-in.https.html> >> ) >> >> fence-report-event-cross-origin-urn-iframe-content-initiated.https.html ( >> test >> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-urn-iframe-content-initiated.https.html>) >> (results >> <https://wpt.fyi/results/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-urn-iframe-content-initiated.https.html> >> ) >> >> fence-report-event-cross-origin-urn-iframe-no-embedder-opt-in.https.html ( >> test >> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-urn-iframe-no-embedder-opt-in.https.html>) >> (results >> <https://wpt.fyi/results/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-urn-iframe-no-embedder-opt-in.https.html> >> ) >> >> fence-report-event-cross-origin-urn-iframe-no-subframe-opt-in.https.html ( >> test >> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-urn-iframe-no-subframe-opt-in.https.html>) >> (results >> <https://wpt.fyi/results/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-urn-iframe-no-subframe-opt-in.https.html> >> ) >> >> fence-report-event-cross-origin-urn-iframe.https.html (test >> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-urn-iframe.https.html>) >> (results >> <https://wpt.fyi/results/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin-urn-iframe.https.html> >> ) >> >> fence-report-event-cross-origin.https.html (test >> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin.https.html>) >> (results >> <https://wpt.fyi/results/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-cross-origin.https.html> >> ) >> >> fence-report-event-sub-fencedframe.https.html (test >> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-sub-fencedframe.https.html>) >> (results >> <https://wpt.fyi/results/fenced-frame/fence-report-event-sub-fencedframe.https.html> >> ) >> >> WPT directory for Fenced Frames: >> https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/tree/master/fenced-frame >> >> Anticipated spec changes >> >> None >> >> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >> >> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5113611084365824 >> >> Links to previous Intent discussions >> >> Fenced Frame Intent to prototype: >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/Ko9UXQYPgUE/m/URRsB-qvAAAJ >> >> >> Fenced Frame Intent to experiment: >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/y6G3cvKXjlg/m/Lcpmpi_LAgAJ >> >> >> Fenced Frame Intent to ship: >> >> >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/tpw8wW0VenQ/m/mePLTiHlDQAJ >> -- >> 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/adafffdd-cebf-4ad9-9df2-18b75571c6ban%40chromium.org >> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/adafffdd-cebf-4ad9-9df2-18b75571c6ban%40chromium.org?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/CA%2BA0o62nkvF0LZNYeyoyk52fU7YuN3rEeXuwvu6S9ZvgWq8%2B0Q%40mail.gmail.com.
