- From: Rayan Kanso <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 07:04:07 -0800
- To: w3ctag/design-reviews <design-reviews@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Received on Wednesday, 6 November 2019 15:04:09 UTC
Hello, That's a very interesting point which I hadn't considered. Let me start by giving some context around why the incognito restriction was added initially. We were worried that a website might force users to use the native application when users are actually trying to use the website in a privacy preserving mode. I think this is a useful privacy improvement that will benefit all origins. On the other hand, the situation described by @lknik might give a select few websites another signal for fingerprinting privacy preserving mode, although it will still have false positives (when users uninstall the pre-installed apps). At this point, I believe the benefits of keeping the privacy preserving mode restrictions outweigh those of the alternative. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/436#issuecomment-550350296
Received on Wednesday, 6 November 2019 15:04:09 UTC