LGTM2
On 11/21/23 2:52 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote:
LGTM1
Thanks for the explanation!!
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 3:49 PM Garrett Tanzer <gtan...@google.com> wrote:
> Can you explain more how this would help with adoption?
Allowing for cookies on the beacons lets testers utilize
Attribution Reporting API’s debug reports
<https://developer.chrome.com/docs/privacy-sandbox/attribution-reporting-debugging/part-1/>,
which are helpful for migrating to the new API. These reports are
gated on third party cookie availability. It also enables testers
to experiment with a single API at a time (e.g., verify that
Protected Audiences with existing measurement methods works as
intended and then add in ARA reporting) which allows for simpler
experiments with greater understanding of the impact of each.
> Wouldn't this create a false sense of "security" amongst early
adopters and cause them to rely on those cookies up until their
deprecation?
We make it abundantly clear in our documentation
<https://developer.chrome.com/docs/privacy-sandbox/attribution-reporting-debugging/part-1/#debug-reports-are-cookie-based>
that debug reports will go away at the point of third-party cookie
deprecation. We have also documented
<https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/884> that these cookies
will only be sent with automatic beacons when third-party cookies
are enabled.
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 4:15 PM Yoav Weiss
<yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 10:23 PM 'Garrett Tanzer' via
blink-dev <blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote:
They should all be requested now.
Thanks
On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 3:45 PM Mike Taylor
<miketa...@chromium.org> wrote:
Hi Garrett,
Would you mind requesting each of the review gates in
the chromestatus entry?
thanks,
Mike
On 11/7/23 12:24 PM, Garrett Tanzer wrote:
Intent to Ship: Protected Audience - Do Not Disable
Cookie Setting in ReportEvent until 3PCD (Chrome - 120)
Contact emails
shivani...@chromium.org
<mailto:shivani...@chromium.org>,
jkar...@chromium.org <mailto:jkar...@chromium.org>,
lbr...@google.com <mailto:lbr...@google.com>,
gtan...@google.com <mailto:gtan...@google.com>
Explainer(s)
https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/884
<https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/884>
Relevant issue: Don't disable cookie setting in
ReportEvent API until 3PCD
<https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/866>
Spec(s):
Since this change is only temporarily allowing
cookies in the automatic beacons and the
functionality change will be deprecated with 3PCD and
it respects 3PC preferences as cookies do today, it
is not added to the spec.
Summary
We launched Fenced Frames for Protected Audience as a
part of Chrome 115. With this change, we are
temporarily un-disabling credentials on the automatic
beacons
<https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/Fenced_Frames_Ads_Reporting.md#support-for-attribution-reporting>initiated
from a fenced frame (or urn iframe) until 3rd party
cookie deprecation (3PCD) to help with adoption.
Can you explain more how this would help with adoption?
Wouldn't this create a false sense of "security" amongst early
adopters and cause them to rely on those cookies up until
their deprecation?
Details
We received a request
(https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/866) to
not disable credentials on automatic beacon reports
until 3PCD for both fenced frames and urn-iframes,
with higher priority for urn iframes. This will help
adtech in running experiments on Protected Audience.
For example, the Attribution Reporting API’s verbose
debugging feature requires cookies to be set in
headers, so it is currently broken for automatic
beacons.
With this change, we will switch the credentials mode
for automatic beacons only from
CredentialsMode::kOmit to CredentialsMode::kInclude.
Please note:
*
This will be gated behind a check that 3rd party
cookies are enabled. This has the effect of
respecting current user preferences and
automatically disabling the change at 3PCD.
*
A parallel change
<https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/822>splits
up automatic beacons into beacons sent on
navigation start and navigation commit. This
change will apply to both.
Blink component
Blink>FencedFrames
<https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EFencedFrames>
TAG reviews and status
N/A since there are no spec changes.
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
There are no compatibility risks, since existing
receiving servers can choose to not use the cookies.
Interoperability
There are no interoperability risks as no other
browsers have decided to implement these features yet.
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
<https://wpt.fyi>.
No. This is tested in browser tests. This will not
become a part of web-standard, so we are not adding
any additional tests in the web-platform. Links for
the original tests are below.
WPT for Fenced Frames:
https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/tree/master/fenced-frame
<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/5170880732987392
<https://chromestatus.com/feature/5170880732987392>
Links to previous Intent discussions
Intent to prototype:
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/Ko9UXQYPgUE/m/URRsB-qvAAAJ
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/Ko9UXQYPgUE/m/URRsB-qvAAAJ>
Intent to experiment:
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/y6G3cvKXjlg/m/Lcpmpi_LAgAJ
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/y6G3cvKXjlg/m/Lcpmpi_LAgAJ>
Intent to ship:
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/tpw8wW0VenQ/m/mePLTiHlDQAJ
<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/CAFk1C%2BNZrECQ9atA9vbZxjFrVtnW-H6z4yPdUt_4nD1q%3Dot61g%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFk1C%2BNZrECQ9atA9vbZxjFrVtnW-H6z4yPdUt_4nD1q%3Dot61g%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/CACykZxqOWNtkLOwW71ZiG3Hu9G8xCyTi%2BcpJay1sZFtZ6UaTJQ%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CACykZxqOWNtkLOwW71ZiG3Hu9G8xCyTi%2BcpJay1sZFtZ6UaTJQ%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/9584d1eb-3145-4277-9677-003ff2c54b3e%40chromium.org.