Re: [w3c/permissions] Semantic Permission Bundles (#191)

As for sensors, I recall the consensus of the group was that bundling to a single permission would regress in terms of privacy protections, albeit it'd improve developer ergonomics. So the high-level use case would be privacy. This was quite a complex issue and it was extensively discussed. I put this to the TPAC agenda https://github.com/w3c/devicesensors-wg/issues/47 so we can have another discussion.

Here's an example that I hopefully got right. A user might be OK to grant permission to accelerometer and gyroscope, but not magnetometer given it could theoretically [disclose the user's location](https://w3c.github.io/magnetometer/#security-and-privacy). What follows is that the page could use relative orientation (a fusion of accelerometer and gyroscope), but not absolute orientation (a fusion of accelerometer, gyroscope and magnetometer). See https://w3c.github.io/motion-sensors/#fusion-sensors for a mapping table from fusion to physical sensors.

This is explained in https://w3c.github.io/sensors/#permission-api using different words.

If such a permission bundle would be defined, would its permission state be transitive to low-level permission states? In both directions? There are probably a bunch of other design considerations that need to be looked into.

WebKit [implements](https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/commit/e8fcdbcc2d499879de1d8812003942b8b91d6bb1) the accelerometer, gyroscope and magnetometer [policy-controlled features](https://github.com/w3c/webappsec-permissions-policy/blob/main/features.md) (was feature policies) that map 1-on-1 to the [permission registry names](https://w3c.github.io/permissions/#permission-registry), and Chrome also ships these.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/permissions/issues/191#issuecomment-906154082