-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
- Loading branch information
1 parent
ec39238
commit 6681505
Showing
1 changed file
with
249 additions
and
0 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,249 @@ | ||
|
|
||
| # Privacy CG telcon - 9 April 2020 | ||
| * Chair: Tanvi | ||
| * Scribe: Peter Saint-Andre | ||
|
|
||
| ## Attendees | ||
| * Erik Anderson (co-chair, Microsoft) | ||
| * Tanvi Vyas (co-chair, Mozilla) | ||
| * Theresa O'Connor (co-chair, Apple) | ||
| * Peter Saint-Andre (Mozilla) | ||
| * Pete Snyder (Brave) | ||
| * Christine Runnegar (PING co-chair) | ||
| * Kris Chapman (Salesforce) | ||
| * Martin Meyer (Akamai) | ||
| * David Senecal (Akamai) | ||
| * John Wilander (Apple) | ||
| * Jack Frankland | ||
| * Sam Weiler (W3C/MIT) | ||
| * Wendell Baker (Verizon Media) | ||
| * Pranjal Jund | ||
| * Scott Low (Microsoft) | ||
| * Sam Tingleff (IAB Tech Lab) | ||
| * Ben Savage (Facebook) | ||
| * Andrew Knox (Facebook) | ||
| * Max Gendler (NY Times) | ||
| * Mark Xue (Apple) | ||
| * James Hartig (Admiral) | ||
| * Wendy Seltzer (W3C) | ||
| * Tiago Ferreira (Metomic) | ||
| * Melanie Richards (Microsoft) | ||
| * Brandon Maslen (Microsoft) | ||
| * Aram Zucker-Scharff (Washington Post) | ||
| * Steven Englehardt (Mozilla) | ||
| * Johann Hofmann (Mozilla) | ||
| * Allan Spiegel (Adobe Digital Experience Platform) | ||
| * Baudisch Rene | ||
| * Ketan Deshpande (Amazon) | ||
| * Carlos Bracho | ||
| * Chris Pedigo (Digital Content Next) | ||
| * Michael Smith | ||
| * Shaun Gilmore (Apple) | ||
| * Sebastian Zimmeck (Wesleyan University) | ||
| * Przemyslaw Iwanczak | ||
| * Thomas Bergemann | ||
| 39 participants on call | ||
|
|
||
| ## Agenda: | ||
| * New Introductions | ||
| * [Charter updates](https://github.com/privacycg/admin/issues/12) | ||
| * [Face-to-face](https://github.com/privacycg/meetings/issues/3) update | ||
| * [Agenda+ items](https://github.com/search?q=org%3Aprivacycg+label%3Aagenda%2B&unscoped_q=label%3Aagenda%2B) | ||
| * [Proposal: Implementing Privacy Rights](https://github.com/privacycg/proposals/issues/10) | ||
| * Upcoming ad-hc meeting on [Bounce Tracking](https://github.com/privacycg/meetings/issues/5) | ||
| * Any other business | ||
|
|
||
| ## New Introductions | ||
|
|
||
| * Chris Pedigo (Digital Content Next) | ||
| * Allan Spiegel (Adobe Experience Platform) | ||
| * Tiago Ferreira (Metomic) | ||
| * Andrew Knox (Facebook) | ||
| * Ben Savage (Facebook) | ||
| * Max Gendler (NY Times) | ||
| * Sebastian Zimmeck (Wesleyan University) | ||
| * Shaun Gilmore (Apple) | ||
|
|
||
| ## [Charter updates](https://github.com/privacycg/admin/issues/12) | ||
|
|
||
| * Tess provides an update | ||
| * Pushed an update a few days ago | ||
| * Charter requires that we announce changes | ||
| * This change consists of bug fixes and clarifications | ||
| * Summary: | ||
| - We now describe what kind of artifact we expect a proposal to produce | ||
| - Clarified rules about when editors make feature additions and removals to work items | ||
| - Clarified need to sign CLA in order to contribute changes | ||
|
|
||
| ## [Face-to-face](https://github.com/privacycg/meetings/issues/3) update | ||
| * May 13-14 15:00-19:00 UTC | ||
| * Wednesday-Thursday | ||
| * This is 8am-11am PDT | ||
| * Evening in Europe | ||
| * Only one respondent from APAC (who works on Pacific Time!) | ||
|
|
||
| ## [Agenda+ items](https://github.com/search?q=org%3Aprivacycg+label%3Aagenda%2B&unscoped_q=label%3Aagenda%2B) | ||
| ### [Proposal: Implementing Privacy Rights](https://github.com/privacycg/proposals/issues/10) | ||
|
|
||
| * Proposal from Sebastian Zimmeck | ||
| * Follows up on CCPA rights and email thread | ||
| * Background | ||
| - CCPA is privacy law in California | ||
| - Regulations say that browser extensions and similar technologies that use automatic signals to tell services not to sell data must be honored | ||
| - Some people asked for changes but the California Attorney General has not made changes | ||
| - This might have implications for DNT | ||
| * What form could the signal take? | ||
| * Could be a simple binary signal | ||
| * But it could be a more robust/granular communication mechanism | ||
| * Basis for this could include headers, cookies, etc. | ||
| * This topic is beyond just web technology, includes policy aspects | ||
| * Sebastian's goal is to help form a standard for meaningful privacy selections for users but also allow monetization of data under reasonable terms | ||
| * Such a standard would bring together multiple stakeholders | ||
| * Output could be a single standard or multiple standards | ||
| * Sebastian submitted the proposal to start the discussion | ||
| * Sebastian and his students have written code toward this | ||
| * Aram Zucker-Scharff | ||
| - Really interested in this issue | ||
| - The signal isn't specified by CCPA laws and regulations | ||
| - Concerned that there could be many signals | ||
| - IAB Consent String process seems like a good starting place | ||
| - IAB has put their spec up on GitHub to gather comments | ||
| - Headers are interesting, but an active request could be a good fallback | ||
| - IAB uses defined interfaces on window objects | ||
| - ??? proposal uses cookies and that's not future-proof | ||
| - IAB proposal requires a per-case active event (not a generic do-not-sell) | ||
| - One challenge is joining user consent with interaction of content | ||
| - We would like consent to travel with the content (but this is hard if that content moves to a third-party site because origins are different and can't necessarily sync in an active way) | ||
| - Need a way to send consent indication to those other sites | ||
| - Audio is hard (podcasts, Spotify, etc.) | ||
| - Possible to present a personalized ad over audio but difficult to sync the consent | ||
| - Hopefully we can address these concerns during standardization | ||
| * Ben Savage | ||
| - Text about "global privacy goals" are ambitious and have gotten attention | ||
| - It's difficult to follow all the rules in all jurisdictions | ||
| - This is especially a burden on smaller companies | ||
| - A single control would simplify matters | ||
| - There's a lot of potential to do this well | ||
| - Concerned that platforms vendors could move quickly and complicate standardization | ||
| - We need a way to provide input to their thinking | ||
| * Chris Pedigo | ||
| - Agree this is a worthwhile effort | ||
| - We need to avoid a profusion of signals | ||
| - There was a lot of controversy in the DNT effort over policy but not so much over technology | ||
| - Things are different now because CCPA is the policy | ||
| - Just need to figure out what the signal looks like | ||
| - Using Storage Access API would be helpful | ||
| * Pete Snyder | ||
| - There have been efforts in PING and other bodies to indicate user desire for stronger privacy in the context of existing standards | ||
| * Sebastian Zimmeck | ||
| - One way to go about this is to define something simple (e.g., a do-not-sell indication) | ||
| - Another is to design a larger framework | ||
| - Which direction we take depends on how the conversation goes | ||
| - Perhaps look not at specific devices or applications but a more general platform (e.g., to store advertising IDs) that publishers and others can query | ||
| - Input is welcome on how to approach things | ||
| * John Wilander | ||
| - We (Apple) are positive about working in this space | ||
| - Our basic policy on WebKit is privacy by default | ||
| - So we need to look at opt in vs. opt out | ||
| - We need to make sure that things are safe by default | ||
| - For instance, the lack of signal on a shared device shouldn't violate user expectations | ||
| - The signal should not become a tracking vector (as happened with DNT) | ||
| * Wendell Baker | ||
| - Verizon is very interested in this as well | ||
| - W3C ran a workshop in 2018 on permissions and user consent (with Brad Kulick) | ||
| - We submitted a position paper to that workshop | ||
| - Posited that such a mechanism should exist | ||
| - Workshop discussion indicated that compliance and notification mechanisms should move to a panel in the browser | ||
| - Concerns were raised that jurisdictional incursions weren't the same across cultures and might move faster than software | ||
| - Mechanism would be a cookie-jar store beyond cookies | ||
| - Various opinions about default-on vs. default-off | ||
| - For instance, some browsers might default users to one state or the other | ||
| - One concern we had about DNT was that content and media were moving from servers to CDNs (same origin concepts are not as straightforward) | ||
| - IAB project around consent management | ||
| - Various proposals to standardize on a particular vendor in the ad world | ||
| - Neutral platform needs to be operated by someone and that can be a blocker | ||
| - (Scott Low): Queue is closed, but Microsoft authored a proposal for an [auditing body](https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/MSEdgeExplainers/blob/master/WebPrivacyAuditing/explainer.md) a while back. We're supportive of helping unblock this in the industry and fleshing out use cases! | ||
| - This comes up in Google's privacy sandbox proposal - need for a neutral entity | ||
| - When consent is registered, by whom and for what? Need an identity system of some kind to make those associations stick | ||
| * James | ||
| - We have implemented both IAB specs for CCPA and GDPR | ||
| - Whatever spec we develop should address both laws | ||
| - GDPR has more cross-origin requirements | ||
| - We've seen a much higher level of confusion about how to implement GDPR | ||
| * Aram Zucker-Scharff | ||
| - Defaulting changes in different regulatory regimes | ||
| - In GDPR, default opt-out | ||
| - In CCPA, user must explicitly opt out | ||
| - How to handle defaulting when we can't determine it? If we (WaPo) can't determine user's location, we should assume that the user is in California and has previously opted out | ||
| - If user has selected opt out in California, need to honor opt out | ||
| - If the user is unknown to us, we have to assume that the user is in our system and has opted out | ||
| - User identity is key here | ||
| - I'd like to recommend against a centralized identity bank | ||
| - Not just the problem of finding someone to maintain it and single point of failure, but even optimally institutions won't necessarily remain trusted | ||
| - User agent needs provide explicit signals | ||
| - Transaprency and consent model needs authenticated participants | ||
| - There is a CCPA negative signal, IAB spec covers this | ||
| * Johann Hofmann | ||
| - We (Firefox team) are very interested in this too | ||
| - We have looked into it conceptually | ||
| - Very concerned about the different interests that are in play | ||
| - Getting together on a common signal is the least of our worries | ||
| - Designing the UX and getting real consent are extremely difficult | ||
| - The UI can lead the user in one direction or another | ||
| - Don't want to end up where we did with DNT | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ### Storage Access API | ||
|
|
||
| #### [Consider moving API to Navigator](https://github.com/privacycg/storage-access/issues/22) | ||
|
|
||
| * Jack Frankland | ||
| - A few comments indicated appetite for expanding the scope | ||
| - Currently the API is bound to iframe | ||
| - If scope were to expand, might not make sense to bind it to the document | ||
| - Not suggesting that we change behavior | ||
| - More about making clear what the scope should be | ||
| - Even though Navigator is global, service worker can register to specific scope | ||
| - Thus the behavior doesn't change | ||
| - Opening up to future flexibility | ||
| * Tess | ||
| - Objects: nav, window, doc | ||
| - These are common places on which to hang APIs | ||
| - Sometimes we don't choose the right place to hang things | ||
| - There are two shipping implementations that use Document | ||
| - In the past when we've made similar moves, we've usually regretted it | ||
| - This caused compatibility problems with DNT | ||
| - Future flexibility might not be a good reason to change things | ||
| * Jack | ||
| - Don't think this needs to change unless it's a hinge for some browsers to implement | ||
|
|
||
| #### [Opt-in mechanism for shared storage access](a) | ||
|
|
||
| * John Wilander | ||
| - Hoping for input here | ||
| - This is the main thing we need to solve | ||
| - Scoping is at the heart of this (per frame, nested frames, frames on page, resources on page) | ||
| - How do we handle restrictions in browser? | ||
| - Blocked vs partitioned could be tricky for IndexedDB | ||
| - Blocked easier - just unblock. But if partitioned, more tricky if you have say open connections to IndexedDB | ||
| - Blocking or partitioning across the board or using a list-based mechanism | ||
| - Harsh behavior for origins on a naughty list minght be more palatable to a browser implementer | ||
| - Whereas across the board policy could lead in a different direction | ||
| - How to handle sibling frames? | ||
| * Steve Englehardt | ||
| - We are still leaning toward all frames on the page | ||
| - Signal to other frames? | ||
| * John Wilander | ||
| - Would like to hear from more developers (e.g., people who deploy with nested iframes) | ||
| - Will things break if we switch for all frames at once? What kind of signal do they need? | ||
| * James Admiral | ||
| - Won't break for us (we have multiple frames but not nested) | ||
| - We're not using IndexedDB | ||
| * John Wilander | ||
| - Send us feedback! | ||
|
|
||
| ## Any other business | ||
| ### Upcoming ad-hoc meeting on Bounce Tracking | ||
| * https://github.com/privacycg/meetings/issues/5 | ||
| * Proposed time: Thursday, April 23rd 10am PDT, after our next teleconference. | ||
|
|