PING – informal chairs’ summary – 19 January 2017

PING – informal chairs’ summary –  19 January 2017

Thanks very much to Christine Runnegar for acting as scribe.

Our next call will be 16 February 2017 at the usual time.

* Requests for privacy reviews:

* Remote Playback API [1] - due 30 Jan
* WebRTC Statistics API [2] - due 30 Jan
* Screen Orientation API [3] - due 12 Feb
* IndexedDB API [4] - originally due 8 Jan

A short discussion of these documents was held on the call; more detailed
comments were forwarded from the mailing list to the respective WGs. Thank
you very much to Simon Rice for providing feedback on the Remote Playback
API. Note that the WebRTC discussion is ongoing, with some open questions
to be resolved [5]. Please send any last-minute comments on the Screen
Orientation API as Github issues [6]. Finally, while the IndexedDB API
comment period was expected to end on 8 January 2017, there is still work
to be done before the specification advances to CR, so please do file any
comments on Github [7].

* I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-client-hints-03.txt
An IETF Internet Draft (“HTTP Client Hints”) was brought to our attention
on the mailing list [8,9], owing to its potential privacy implications (for
fingerprinting, in particular). Nick Doty will take on some follow-up work
on this topic. (Further discussion has been ongoing on the PING mailing
list.)

* ePrivacy Directive
Lukasz Olejnik posted some comments to the PING mailing list [10] in
response to the leaked draft of the updated EU ePrivacy Directive [11].
There has been discussion of this topic in other groups (notably the
Tracking Protection WG) but given the broad implications for privacy, this
is an item for PING to keep an eye on.

* Privacy questionnaire
Christine Runnegar will be renewing efforts to address the questionnaire
[12], with the work being broken down into smaller pieces (instead of
revising at once) so that the group can tackle manageable, specific chunks
of work.

* Web Security Interest Group
Tara Whalen attended the Web Security IG call on 19 January and brought a
summary back to PING. The charter was updated and renewed [13]; the
Security IG also discussed how to keep up with the volume of reviews (i.e.,
how to find qualified reviewers and how to manage the workload). Given the
overlap with PING, our own group discussion raised the point that we should
try to combine reviews when we can. One concrete way to proceed would be to
coordinate reviews on the monthly calls: we should continue to invite
representatives from the various WGs to present their specifications for
review on the PING call, and to coordinate so that Security IG members can
attend so that we can have one combined discussion of the issues under
consideration.

Link to the minutes: https://www.w3.org/2017/01/19-privacy-minutes.html

Christine and Tara

[1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-privacy/2016OctDec/0062.html
[2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-privacy/2017JanMar/0008.html
[3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-privacy/2017JanMar/0001.html
[4] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-privacy/2017JanMar/0000.html
[5] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-privacy/2017JanMar/0008.html
[6] https://github.com/w3c/screen-orientation/issues
[7] http://w3c.github.io/IndexedDB/
[8] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-privacy/2016OctDec/0056.html
[9] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-client-hints-03
[10]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-privacy/2016OctDec/0059.html
[11]
http://www.politico.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/POLITICO-e-privacy-directive-review-draft-december.pdf
[12] https://github.com/w3c/ping/
[13] https://www.w3.org/2011/07/security-ig-charter.html