Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

FYI Private State Token API Permissions Policy Default Allowlist Wildcard #990

Closed
1 task done
arichiv opened this issue Sep 9, 2024 · 2 comments
Closed
1 task done
Assignees
Labels
Focus: Security (complete) Resolution: satisfied with concerns The TAG is satisfied with this work overall but requires changes security-tracker Group bringing to attention of security, or tracked by the security Group but not needing response. Topic: security features

Comments

@arichiv
Copy link

arichiv commented Sep 9, 2024

こんにちは TAG-さん!

I'm requesting a TAG review of Private State Token API Permissions Policy Default Allowlist Wildcard.

Access to the Private State Token API is gated by Permissions Policy features. We proposed to update the default allowlist for both private-state-token-issuance and private-state-token-redemption features from self to * (wildcard).

Further details:

  • I have reviewed the TAG's Web Platform Design Principles
  • Relevant time constraints or deadlines: None
  • The group where the work on this specification is currently being done: WICG
  • Major unresolved issues with or opposition to this specification: None
  • This work is being funded by: Google Chrome

Past Evaluation: #414

@jyasskin
Copy link
Contributor

I left some questions in https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/5jI8kLLdIFw/m/_810WhKGAwAJ, and we should wait for a reply before discussing in the TAG.

@martinthomson
Copy link
Contributor

We discussed this in a breakout and have a couple concerns:

  • This change increases the by-default exposure of the page to entities that might "use up" its limit of 2 issuers. You've suggested that the top-level page should call the API to explicitly pick its issuers, before allowing 3p script to run. We're skeptical that that's a practical defense. You're right that it's a pre-existing issue with the API, but because this change makes the risk worse, it would be good to improve the defense before making this change.

  • We're not the right body to judge whether the privacy implications are reasonable. Could you ask the Privacy WG to review this system?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Focus: Security (complete) Resolution: satisfied with concerns The TAG is satisfied with this work overall but requires changes security-tracker Group bringing to attention of security, or tracked by the security Group but not needing response. Topic: security features
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants