On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 12:57 AM, L. David Baron <dba...@dbaron.org> wrote:
> On Thursday 2017-04-06 00:33 -0400, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > > In general, I should also say that designing features with > > fingerprinting in mind is *extremely* difficult and takes a lot of > > effort on the part of all browser vendors, which would be difficult to > > do effectively without some broad agreement that the extra effort spent > > is worth it. WHATWG (in HTML at least) mostly treats this by > > documenting the exposed vectors > > <https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/introduction.html# > fingerprinting-vector>. > > I wonder what the position of the W3C TAG is? > > That's actually a pretty easy question to answer: > https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/unsanctioned-tracking/ > (Unsanctioned Web Tracking, W3C TAG Finding 17 July 2015) > Oh, right. Thanks for the link. (Now I remember that I had read this, and forgotten it!) Given < https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/unsanctioned-tracking/#limitations-of-technical-solutions> and the previous links I posted, what _is_ Mozilla's official's policy towards fingerprinting? In reality we do act as if we believe that it is untenable to protect against it purely by restricting new Web features at this point, so if this isn't our official policy it would be useful to have that conversation explicitly. If it isn't, we shouldn't be holding people to a higher bar than respecting privacy.resistsFingerprinting (or where we really place that bar. :-) Cheers, -- Ehsan _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
