- From: Robin Berjon via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2022 08:03:01 +0000
- To: public-patcg@w3.org
To get this definitively out of the way: a system like IPA makes it very significantly easier to comply with all privacy legal regimes that I am familiar with. It is a huge improvement in data protection, guarantees purpose limitation, ensures single controllership, guarantees no sell-or-share, etc. From a risk assessment perspective, it's all the value of attribution with almost none of the risk. With my compliance hat on, if a product team came to me and used cookies when IPA is available, they'd have to have a very good reason. From an econ perspective, IPA prevents externalities that arise from unpredictable inferences, eliminates the historical unfair advantage given to third parties (who can see all) over first parties, and prevents lateral market capture with its enforcement of purpose limitation. These properties will be shared by many other technical solution - that's the point. Additionally, can the group agree to a ban on making frivolous claims on behalf of regulators? It keeps coming up in random issues and I have seen no evidence that they are helpful or represent anything other than wishful interpretations. -- GitHub Notification of comment by darobin Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/patcg/patwg-charter/issues/8#issuecomment-1085561254 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 1 April 2022 08:03:02 UTC