W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-status@w3.org > November 2011

Re: CfC: Battery Last Call

From: Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 11:44:03 +0100
Message-ID: <4EC636F3.9000601@lamouri.fr>
To: public-device-status@w3.org
On 11/17/2011 05:07 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:
>> 2. A bit more sensitive information like whether the device has a battery or not. We do not expose clearly this information but you can get it by doing (battery.chargingTime == battery.dischargingTime) both will be Infinity if the device is battery-less. This information can't be used to attack the user but can help fingerprinting her/him: it's adding one bit of entropy (as far as I understand it). I believe this bit of entropy is not a big deal given that there are far more than one [1].
>> However, do we care about that? do we want to make it impossible for any consumer of Battery Status API to know if the device has a battery? If we don't, we should probably add an attribute that makes this more obvious like navigator.battery.hasBattery.
> It's a trade-off. I think that 1) Battery is useful, 2) one bit isn't much, and 3) shielding this behind a doorhanger makes it close to useless.

I tend to agree. Then, shall we add an attribute to the BatteryManager 
object that explicitly says if there is a battery in the device?

Received on Friday, 18 November 2011 10:44:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:42:59 UTC