On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 12:02 PM Alex Russell <slightly...@chromium.org> wrote:
> It would be good to see a more thorough considered alternatives section in > the explainer. It's not immediately clear what (in code) the alternatives > would entail. > Sure, we could do that. I filed this issue <https://github.com/WICG/digital-credentials/issues/135> and left some questions for you there to better understand what you're looking for (beyond all the alternative proposals I've already linked to for details). > On Mon, Jun 24, 2024, 7:28 AM Mike Taylor <miketa...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> LGTM to experiment for 6 milestones from M128 to M133 inclusive. >> On 6/22/24 1:44 PM, Rick Byers wrote: >> >> Hello blink-dev, >> I'd like to request permission to start an OT for this API. There's still >> a lot to figure out in the larger space of digital credentials on the web >> <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Z7blMTME1tAQAdO-Wr42oVNN3CRIbklASjbJdB1JYOc/edit?resourcekey=0-ockU2NbemVbLEeF94-peNA#slide=id.p>, >> but with eIDAS >> <https://www.identity.com/eidas-2-0-redefining-digital-identity-in-the-eu/#What_Are_the_Objectives_of_eIDAS_20> >> regulation passing in the EU which requires large platforms like Google to >> accept such credentials before 2026, we believe it's urgent to start >> testing out better solutions in the wild and try to rapidly iterate on >> designs. >> >> Thanks, >> Rick >> >> Contact emails rby...@chromium.org, g...@chromium.org >> >> Explainer >> https://github.com/WICG/digital-credentials/blob/main/explainer.md >> >> Specification https://wicg.github.io/digital-credentials >> >> Summary >> >> Websites can and do get credentials from mobile wallet apps through a >> variety of mechanisms today (custom URL handlers, QR code scanning, etc.). >> This Web Platform feature would allow sites to request identity information >> from wallets via Android's IdentityCredential CredMan system. It is >> extensible to support multiple credential formats (eg. ISO mDoc and W3C >> verifiable credential) and allows multiple wallet apps to be used. >> Mechanisms >> <https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/1L68tmNXCQXucsCV8eS8CBd_F9FZ6TNwKNOaFkA8RfwI/edit> >> are being added to help reduce the risks >> <https://github.com/w3cping/credential-considerations/> of >> ecosystem-scale abuse of real-world identity. >> >> Blink component Blink>Identity>DigitalCredentials >> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EIdentity%3EDigitalCredentials> >> >> TAG review Mozilla feedback >> <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1003> from Martin >> (also on the TAG) suggests we need to invest more in the threat model for >> the larger space and clarify specific privacy mitigations before requesting >> TAG review. We are involved in ongoing work >> <https://github.com/w3cping/credential-considerations/> in the PING to >> analyze and provide guidelines for the larger space of digital credentials >> on the web. >> >> TAG review status Not started >> >> Risks >> >> Interoperability and Compatibility >> >> There are multiple standards efforts involved here. We have been working >> with WebKit and Mozilla in the WICG on defining this specific API. But the >> greater interoperability risk will come from the data that is sent and >> returned via this API. Details of that are still in discussions but mostly >> driven outside the web browser community in the OpenID Foundation (eg. >> OpenID4VP: >> https://openid.net/specs/openid-4-verifiable-presentations-1_0.html) and >> ISO (18013-7 "mdoc": https://www.iso.org/standard/82772.html) >> >> >> *Gecko*: Negative ( >> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1003) We share >> most of Mozilla's concerns and continue to work with them (and the broader >> community) on mitigations. I believe we feel greater risk for the >> established practice of custom schemes becoming prevalent than Mozilla does >> (eg. due to Google being mandated by eIDAS regulation to accept EUDI >> credentials by 2026). >> >> *WebKit*: In development ( >> https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/332) WebKit >> implementation progress: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=268516 >> >> *Web developers*: No signals >> >> *Other signals*: This work in the W3C PING is relevant: >> https://github.com/w3cping/credential-considerations/ >> >> Ergonomics >> >> There's a possibility that these credentials will be used alongside other >> types of credentials in the future - such as optionally minting a passkey >> when a digital credential is used to sign up for a site, or by allowing >> sign-up with either a digital credential or a federated credential via >> FedCM. As such we argued it was best to put this work in the context of the >> Credential Management API. However there's also a compelling argument that >> identity claims are much more than "credentials" and should evoke different >> developer expectations. The agreed upon compromise was to add a new >> credential container at 'navigator.identity'. >> >> >> Activation >> >> The primary activation concern is enabling existing deployments using >> technology like OpenID4VP to be able to also support this API. As such we >> have left the request protocol unspecified at this layer, to be specified >> along with existing request protocols to maximize activation opportunity. >> >> >> Security >> >> See >> https://github.com/WICG/digital-credentials/blob/main/horizontal-reviews/security-privacy.md >> and https://github.com/WICG/digital-credentials/issues/115 >> >> >> WebView application risks >> >> No >> >> Goals for experimentation We want to gather initial feedback from >> production usage of end-to-end scenarios involving at least one wallet and >> at least one real-world verifier website (partners committed but not yet >> disclosed publicly). >> >> We will be looking to the verifier for feedback on usability. Eg. does a >> "use my digital wallet" button work OK in practice even when few users >> have such a credential? To what extent do users report feeling more >> comfortable sing selective disclosure of their age as compared to providing >> a photo of their driver's license? >> >> Ongoing technical constraints >> >> None >> >> >> Debuggability >> >> None necessary - just new JS API. For testing we may want to add a >> developer option to provide a fake wallet (as for the devtools fake >> authenticator for WebAuthn), but this is not urgent. >> >> >> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, >> Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)? No >> >> Android only initially due to the nature of communicating with Android >> wallet apps. We will be creating another feature soon for "cross-device >> presentment" which will use the identical API on desktop, but will have a >> separate intent for that. >> >> >> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >> ? We have initial tests here: >> >> >> https://wpt.fyi/results/credential-management/digital-identity.https.html?label=experimental&label=master&aligned >> >> >> >> DevTrial instructions >> https://github.com/WICG/digital-identities/wiki/HOWTO%3A-Try-the-Prototype-API-in-Chrome-Android >> >> Flag name on chrome://flags web-identity-digital-credentials >> >> Finch feature name WebIdentityDigitalCredentials >> >> Requires code in //chrome? True >> >> Tracking bug https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40257092 >> >> Launch bug https://launch.corp.google.com/launch/4268575 >> >> Estimated milestones >> OriginTrial Android last 134 >> OriginTrial Android first 128 >> DevTrial on Android 119 >> >> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5166035265650688?gate=4923904445906944 >> >> Links to previous Intent discussions Intent to prototype: >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL9PXLx3sHWmdE-ikAEDay_S3ijf0%2BfxB_LbsuOx8YJx%2BZA7%2Bg%40mail.gmail.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 blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY_t3qqjJ_SpuyXvStGiN9qvKSn4w%2BC2nEbR2tRbwHKm_g%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY_t3qqjJ_SpuyXvStGiN9qvKSn4w%2BC2nEbR2tRbwHKm_g%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/3ff9c35f-71b0-4a88-a5ad-023664df88ad%40chromium.org >> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/3ff9c35f-71b0-4a88-a5ad-023664df88ad%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/CAFUtAY-421uDmu2WNDBG5bYRSWAhfmahsHPVjDwN5NLkUdCkvw%40mail.gmail.com.
