On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 10:00 PM Mike Taylor <miketa...@chromium.org> wrote:
> Thanks, LGTM1 pending the PRs landing. > On 9/12/23 12:29 AM, Caleb Raitto wrote: > > Hi Mike, > > Pull request 695 <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/695> is the > change to update the explainer to describe the new header-based > directFromSellerSignals, whereas 771 > <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/771> and 774 > <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/774> are for the spec changes. > > The explainer change describes usage of the new API and provides context > for the differences between header-based and the prior bundles based > versions of directFromSellerSignals, whereas the spec change describes how > to implement the header-based version. > > We intend to land all 3 pull requests. > > Thanks, > > -Caleb > On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 11:18:26 AM UTC-4 Mike Taylor wrote: > >> >> On 9/11/23 12:55 PM, Mike Taylor wrote: >> >> On 9/7/23 6:00 PM, Caleb Raitto wrote: >> >> Hi Yoav, some responses inline: >> >> On Wednesday, September 6, 2023 at 12:15:45 PM UTC-4 Yoav Weiss wrote: >> >> On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 9:55 PM Paul Jensen <pauljen...@chromium.org> >> wrote: >> >> Contact emails >> >> >> * pauljen...@chromium.org <pauljen...@chromium.org> *Explainer >> >> * https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/69 >> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/695>5 * >> >> >> Can you clarify what this does, as the explainer is not very explain-y? >> >> IIUC, the current flow to get directFromSellerSignals is to download a >> response A which contains a link to a WBN, then download the WBN and that >> contains the signal info. >> Your proposal is to change that so that the directFromSellerSignals >> information would be embedded in a response header on response A? >> >> >> The original directFromSellerSignals worked by downloading a response A, >> from the seller’s origin, that is a WBN containing several subresources >> that represent signals from the seller to various auction participants -- >> no linking was involved. >> >> Can you outline that flow more explicitly? Apologies, but I'd like to better understand its performance characteristics. IIUC, in both cases we have an initial page that triggers a request, where in one that request is to a WBN (using a <link> ?) and the other it's to a random resource using fetch({adAuctionHeaders: true}) ? I guess it's unclear to me why the former would be slower than the latter, especially given the large payloads and the fact that headers can't really be compressed. >> You’re correct about this header-based version of directFromSellerSignals >> -- when Chrome downloads a response, from the seller’s origin, with >> fetch(..., >> {adAuctionHeaders: true}), the Ad-Auction-Signals header gets parsed as >> JSON to provide the signals. >> >> >> >> If so, any more details on that header? What would be the header name? >> What payload sizes should we expect for the header's value? In what >> conditions will it actually be processed? >> >> >> The name of the header is Ad-Auction-Signals, as mentioned here in the >> explainer: [0]. Currently, the payload size is limited to 1kb [1], but >> we’re considering increasing that to 10kb based on feedback. When Chrome >> conducts a Protected Audience auction, it processes any received >> Ad-Auction-Signals headers whose adSlot matches that of the auction. The >> header contains JSON that dictates which signals are sent to which auction >> participants. >> >> 1K header is a lot. 10KB header is... really a lot. Have you tested that with a variety of CDNs and other intermediaries? I wouldn't be surprised if those values would break some assumptions in existing HTTP proxying software. Also, the JSON y'all are sending doesn't seem extremely nested. Have you considered structured fields <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8941.html>? > >> [0] >> https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/695/files#diff-d65ba9778fe3af46de3edfce2266b5b035192f8869280ec07179963b81f4e624R465 >> >> [1] >> https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:content/browser/interest_group/ad_auction_url_loader_interceptor.cc;l=195;drc=dcd52bb9a48216858a950b919383c44a290273f7 >> >> Thanks for the explanation - what's preventing >> https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/695 from landing? It seems >> rather old (and references stuff that no longer exists, like >> `X-FLEDGE-Auction-Only`. (It also doesn't seem to define any error-handling >> for parsing the JSON that a server returns, which would be good to do.) >> >> I maybe have just been confused. I'm not sure if 695 is intended to land, >> beyond 771 and 774, both of which have much more recent activity. >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> -Caleb >> >> >> Specification >> >> >> * https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/771 >> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/771> >> https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/774 >> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/774> *Summary >> >> >> * Protected Audience already supports a mechanism to ensure the >> authenticity and integrity of information passed into the auction from the >> seller called directFromSellerSignals. Currently this is implemented by the >> seller providing subresources in a WebBundle to the browser, which after a >> year of testing has proved to not be as efficient as originally planned. It >> either requires an entirely new additional fetch of a WebBundle, or for the >> seller to rewrite and rework an existing fetch to respond instead with only >> a WebBundle. This feature is a rewrite of directFromSellerSignals to use an >> HTTP response header, transferred via HTTPS same-origin with the seller, >> instead of a WebBundle to optimize performance. *Blink component >> >> >> * Blink>InterestGroups >> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EInterestGroups> >> *TAG review >> >> >> * The parent proposal, Protected Audience, is still pending: >> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/723 >> <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/723> *TAG review status >> >> >> * Pending *Risks >> >> Interoperability and Compatibility >> >> * None as this is an optional new way of providing >> directFromSellerSignals. It cannot be used jointly with the old mechanism, >> but there shouldn’t be a need to use the old mechanism. * >> >> >> * Gecko & WebKit: No signal on parent proposal, Protected Audience. >> Asked in the Mozilla forum here >> <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/770>, and in the >> Webkit forum here >> <https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/158>. * >> >> >> * Web developers: Adtech asked for this via this Protected Audience >> Github issue >> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/119#issuecomment-1274013176>. * >> >> >> >> Debuggability >> >> >> * This feature affects values provided to Protected Audience scripts >> (generateBid(), reportResult(), reportWin()) which are debuggable via >> Chrome DevTools. This feature also includes console log warnings on parse >> failures. *Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms >> (Windows, Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)? >> >> >> * It will be supported on all platforms that support Protected Audience, >> so all but WebView. *Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >> ? >> >> >> * We plan to add WPTs to cover this API in the next month. *Flag name on >> chrome://flags >> >> >> * None *Finch feature name >> >> >> * FledgeDirectFromSellerSignalsHeaderAdSlot *Requires code in //chrome? >> >> >> * False *Estimated milestones >> >> >> * Shipping on desktop and Android in M117. *Anticipated spec changes >> >> >> * None related to this feature. *Link to entry on the Chrome Platform >> Status >> >> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5165311598264320 >> >> 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 blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/ >> chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CABQTWrkbaAuRoxPUtrQnxyS-W%3DfZjba1JN% >> 2BHCHyLmKCKveHXOg%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CABQTWrkbaAuRoxPUtrQnxyS-W%3DfZjba1JN%2BHCHyLmKCKveHXOg%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/5c238b79-7120-4089-a8d7-dc1e67f956fcn%40chromium.org >> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/5c238b79-7120-4089-a8d7-dc1e67f956fcn%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/CAL5BFfUc%2BvLDh6kwwSy%2BN8TO52LLdHG2X%2BgLfHpd-FtmnfpbJg%40mail.gmail.com.
