- From: David Bennett <ddt@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:24:16 -0700
- To: Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>
- Cc: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, Arve Bersvendsen <arveb@opera.com>, "public-webapps@w3c.org" <public-webapps@w3c.org>
- Message-ID: <bfeaf0180909171424m45be0f64l5eb02bf2f1a81d9b@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org> wrote: > I don't believe that's what Frederick is talking about. Also, fuzzing and > rounding don't apply to the proposal you just sent out since it's now just > an event (rather than a timer based API). Well, there is still a query to find the idle time in a second resolution that could be fuzzed. > I think there is some merit to Jonas and Frederick's comments. We are > leaking more information (but not a lot more) about a users habits than we > did before. I haven't responded to them yet because I don't have a good > answer. :-) > True we are leaking a little more information, although a lot of this is determinable using other mechanisms already although not as accurately. It does require the user to spend a lot of time on a specific site, or have a specific site up in their browser all the time. Which could already be used for a lot of this sort of targeting. Employers would just install an app or a plugin to the browser :) Good luck, David. > > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:08 PM, David Bennett <ddt@google.com> wrote: > >> This is why we changed the resolution to be a second, it is a lot harder >> to figure out traffic analysis and user analysis patterns with the lower >> resolution idle information. >> We discussed adding some fuzzing into the data returned, for example >> rounding all results to be on a 15 second boundary, or on a minute boundary, >> this sounds reasonable to me too if it will reduce privacy issues and >> traffic analysis problems. >> >> Thanks, >> David. >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Frederick Hirsch < >> frederick.hirsch@nokia.com> wrote: >> >>> isn't the mere knowledge of the level of activity on a device a possible >>> privacy concern, and couldn't the pattern of activity offer a traffic >>> analysis type opportunity? >>> >>> regards, Frederick >>> >>> Frederick Hirsch >>> Nokia >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sep 17, 2009, at 1:35 PM, ext Jeremy Orlow wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 12:50 AM, Arve Bersvendsen <arveb@opera.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:05:58 +0200, David Bennett <ddt@google.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I have a proposal for an extension to javascript to enable browsers to >>>> access system idle information. Please give me feedback and suggestions >>>> on the proposal. >>>> >>>> >>>> What exactly are the security and privacy implications of detecting >>>> system >>>> idle activity in the browser? >>>> >>>> As far as I know, there really aren't any. This was discussed on WhatWG >>>> (before being directed here) and IIRC there were no serious security or >>>> privacy concerns. The minimum resolution of the event makes attacks based >>>> on keystroke timing impossible. Some people suggested that web apps could >>>> do something "bad" while the user is away, but I don't think anyone could >>>> come up with a good example of something "bad". Can you think of any >>>> specific concerns? >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:43 AM, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com> wrote: >>>> Hi David, >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sep 17, 2009, at 00:05 , David Bennett wrote: >>>> I have a proposal for an extension to javascript to enable browsers to >>>> access system idle information. Please give me feedback and suggestions on >>>> the proposal. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> SUMMARY >>>> >>>> There currently is no way to detect the system idle state in the >>>> browser. For example this makes it difficult to deal with any sort of chat >>>> room or instant messaging client inside the browser since the idle will >>>> always be incorrect; or allow for apps to control their speed or network >>>> resources when a user is idle. >>>> >>>> This sounds like it /could/ (not sure and no promises) be an area of >>>> work for DAP, given that it is about device/system information, and given >>>> that I would expect the user to be in very solid control of the security >>>> policy granting access to such information. I guess it could perhaps be >>>> exposed as a system property, part of the System Information work. >>>> >>>> I'm not sure this is the type of API we need to ask the user about. Web >>>> apps can already detect when you're on their page, so I'm not sure how >>>> valuable the additional information you would be leaking is. I'd assume >>>> browsers could have a big hammer like "disable idle reporting" for any users >>>> who are particularly concerned. >>>> >>>> >>>> In case it's not clear, I think this is a good proposal and all my >>>> concerns were addressed in previous threads: >>>> http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-August/022443.html >>>> >>> >>> >> >
Received on Thursday, 17 September 2009 21:24:57 UTC