FYI I decided to write the explainer and linked it in the feature. Here is
a link to it as well:
https://github.com/w3c/secure-payment-confirmation/blob/main/explainer-capabilities.md
.

On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 3:10 PM Darwin Yang <[email protected]> wrote:

> The API Proposal linked as the explainer
> <https://github.com/w3c/secure-payment-confirmation/issues/290#issuecomment-3806454419>
>  includes
> background on the problem, the value of solving it, and alternative APIs
> that were considered. Was there something specific that you were looking
> for in a separate explainer that wouldn't just paraphrase the API proposal?
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 2:51 PM Alex Russell <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> The API (as I understand it from the comment that's linked in lieu of an
>> Explainer) is gated by a Promise, so that gives us a chance to retrofit
>> with other checks in the future.
>>
>> I'd be happier with an FYI to the TAG if there were a real Explainer that
>> describes the value of the problem being solved and the alternatives that
>> were considered. Is it possible to get one of those?
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Alex
>>
>> On Wednesday, March 11, 2026 at 9:02:38 AM UTC-7 Darwin Yang wrote:
>>
>>> Given that this is a new capability we're shipping first, why isn't a
>>>> TAG review applicable?
>>>
>>> Looking at the Webauthn GetClientCapabilities API
>>> <https://chromestatus.com/feature/5128205875544064?gate=5206408640069632> 
>>> which
>>> is similar to this, they were able to FYI their TAG review
>>> <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1016>. If I were to
>>> get one, I was wondering if I could do the same.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 10:17 AM Darwin Yang <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Just to confirm, access to this API is gated behind a user-initiated
>>>>> flow? That is, we don't create any additional fingerprinting risk until
>>>>> such time as the user is attempting a transaction?
>>>>
>>>> No, it is not gated behind a user-initiated flow but as mentioned in
>>>> the privacy review, the TPM detection as a fingerprinting vector is already
>>>> possible without this ne API.
>>>>
>>>> Given that this is a new capability we're shipping first, why isn't a
>>>>> TAG review applicable?
>>>>
>>>> Although this is a new API, the ability to get this information (BBK
>>>> availability) is not new and can be obtained through the SPC payment
>>>> request show method. This would be similar to the SPC availability API
>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/feature/5165040614768640>.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 1:59 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 3:23 PM Chromestatus <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> *Contact emails*
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Explainer*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/secure-payment-confirmation/issues/290#issuecomment-3806454419
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Specification*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://w3c.github.io/secure-payment-confirmation/#sctn-secure-payment-confirmation-capabilities
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Design docs*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.w3.org/wbs/83744/spc-mvp-2025/results
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/secure-payment-confirmation/issues/290#issuecomment-3806454419
>>>>>> https://www.w3.org/2026/01/29-wpwg-minutes.html#3919
>>>>>> https://www.w3.org/2026/02/26-wpwg-minutes.html#bbkdetect
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Summary*
>>>>>> Adds a new static method to the Payment Request that allows web
>>>>>> developers to get the capabilities of the browser's implementation of
>>>>>> Secure Payment Confirmation. This helps web developers to easily know 
>>>>>> what
>>>>>> capabilities are available for Secure Payment Confirmation so they can
>>>>>> decide whether or not they want to use Secure Payment Confirmation with
>>>>>> those capabilities.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Blink component*
>>>>>> Blink>Payments
>>>>>> <https://issues.chromium.org/issues?q=customfield1222907:%22Blink%3EPayments%22>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Web Feature ID*
>>>>>> secure-payment-confirmation
>>>>>> <https://webstatus.dev/features/secure-payment-confirmation>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Motivation*
>>>>>> This feature allows web developers to check for which capabilities
>>>>>> are supported in the browser's implementation of Secure Payment
>>>>>> Confirmation. Web developers want an easy way to check whether hardware
>>>>>> browser bound keys are available with the Secure Payment Confirmation API
>>>>>> and only use the API if if they are available. Without this method, web
>>>>>> developers would need to initiate the Secure Payment Confirmation flow 
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> force users to go through the dialog and authenticate just to ignore the
>>>>>> data returned if it did not contain the browser bound key (in cases where
>>>>>> browser bound keys are not available).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Initial public proposal*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/secure-payment-confirmation/issues/290#issuecomment-3806454419
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Search tags*
>>>>>> spc <http:///features#tags:spc>, bbk <http:///features#tags:bbk>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *TAG review*
>>>>>> *No information provided*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Given that this is a new capability we're shipping first, why isn't a
>>>>> TAG review applicable?*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *TAG review status*
>>>>>> Not applicable
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Risks*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Interoperability and Compatibility*
>>>>>> The GetSecurePaymentConfirmationCapabilities method is new and the
>>>>>> only risk is if other browser do not implement it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Gecko*: No signal (
>>>>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/570) Firefox
>>>>>> haven't implemented SPC yet so this new method is not relevant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *WebKit*: No signal (
>>>>>> https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/30) Safari
>>>>>> haven't implemented SPC yet so this new method is not relevant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Web developers*: Positive (
>>>>>> https://www.w3.org/2026/01/29-wpwg-minutes.html#3919) Discussed the
>>>>>> GetSecurePaymentConfirmationCapabilities method during the WPWG when
>>>>>> proposing a solution to Browser Bound Key Feature Detection and did not
>>>>>> receive any comments opposed to this feature.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Other signals*:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *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?
>>>>>> *No information provided*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Debuggability*
>>>>>> Web developers should be able to inspect the output of the new method
>>>>>> which is defined in WebIDL, thus no changes are needed in devtools.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows,
>>>>>> Mac, Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)?*
>>>>>> No
>>>>>> The GetSecurePaymentConfirmationCapabilities method will only be
>>>>>> added to platforms that support Secure Payment Confirmation which are
>>>>>> currently only Android, macOS, and Windows.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests
>>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>?*
>>>>>> No
>>>>>> Web platform tests are in development. We can only test if the method
>>>>>> is available and can be called as user agents have the ability to omit
>>>>>> capabilities (for privacy reasons).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Flag name on about://flags*
>>>>>> *No information provided*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Finch feature name*
>>>>>> SecurePaymentConfirmationCapabilities
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Rollout plan*
>>>>>> Will ship enabled for all users
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Requires code in //chrome?*
>>>>>> False
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Tracking bug*
>>>>>> https://crbug.com/484043990
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Launch bug*
>>>>>> https://launch.corp.google.com/launch/4448199
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Measurement*
>>>>>> A new GetSecurePaymentConfirmationCapabilities UseCounter will be
>>>>>> created and used.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Availability expectation*
>>>>>> The GetSecurePaymentConfirmationCapabilities method will only be
>>>>>> available in Chromium browsers for the foreseeable future.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Estimated milestones*
>>>>>> Shipping on desktop 147
>>>>>> Shipping on Android 147
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *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).
>>>>>> *No information provided*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/4727235745546240?gate=4769560794365952
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Links to previous Intent discussions*
>>>>>> Intent to Prototype:
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/69a0a6a7.050a0220.3c921b.02ae.GAE%40google.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status
>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.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 [email protected].
>>>>>> To view this discussion visit
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/69b02941.710a0220.50957.0104.GAE%40google.com
>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/69b02941.710a0220.50957.0104.GAE%40google.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 [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAGben6kHdSsa%3DFKtwRPogrg_Z5mg-Q3Yb72jtv3qFLD%2BZ-4p2w%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to