Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Review request for Protected Audience (Issue #723)

Hi @jensenpaul - We're coming back to this and re-reviewing based on the info you've provided.  We remain concerned with the processing burden that this spec proposes to place on the user's device (in terms of battery life, bandwidth, performance in general).  We recognize that that's in service of privacy – however, the question remains: are these use cases fundamental enough the functioning of the web to justify adding such a complex subsystem.  
  
We recognize that this does more than the [Topics API proposal](https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/726).  However considering the Topics API proposal also proposes subject-related groups and this proposes "interest groups", is there scope to reuse Topics for that part of this API?

Also - interest groups are a group of people with a common interest - but we don't understand how such a group would "bid" (first bullet point in the explainer summary). It seems like as a user you would not have control over what interest group you are part of - as this is set by the "owner" of the group.  Even if the user has the ability to opt out of being part of such a group, given the number of possible groups sthey could be part of, this could constitute unreasonable [privacy labor](https://w3ctag.github.io/privacy-principles/#dfn-privacy-labor).  We've already highlighted some [concerns](https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/726#issuecomment-1612522047) regarding this approach in Topics – particularly when it comes to protected characteristics / marginalized groups.  It appears that Protected Audience would suffer from the same issues.
  
You've stated that relaxing the network access constraints of Fenced Frames for this API is "temporary" - what is needed to reinstate this constraint? Do you have a planned path for this? Is there a risk that adding this constraint back will be difficult once this API is in use?

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/723#issuecomment-1829374317
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/723/1829374317@github.com>