- From: Appelquist, Daniel, VF-Group <Daniel.Appelquist@vodafone.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:27:15 +0200
- To: "tag" <www-tag@w3.org>
- Cc: "Oracle" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>, "Noah Mendelsohn" <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
- Message-ID: <C8C120DB.144D8%daniel.appelquist@vodafone.com>
Hello Noah -- Unfortunately I must give my regrets for todayıs call as well due to a family conflict. However, I am happy to ³take the lead² in organizing this discussion at the f2f. Additionally, I have started to reach out to a few people in the bay area to join us as guests at the tag f2f. Namely: Brendan Eich and Jon Ferraiolo, Doug Crockford. The time-frame I have in mind is to take the whole of the afternoon of the 21st for guest discussions (structured as a "TAG Office Hours"). Dan On 23/09/2010 14:28, "Noah Mendelsohn" <nrm@arcanedomain.com> wrote: > You are confirming my intuition that this is very troubling, if not > entirely surprising. I think it spans the work that Ashok is doing on > client-side storage, and the work you are driving DanA on privacy. > > I'm tempted to suggest that we devote some time at the F2F to this > particular constellation of concerns: I.e. how the various client-side > state capabilities of user agents can be used together to thwart the user's > ability to control identity tracking, other privacy concerns etc. > > What's less clear to me is how to frame this. I think the best use of F2F > time is if one or two TAG members work on this actively during the coming > few weeks, with the goal of having the facts gathered and the issues well > framed by the time we meet. I know Ashok is traveling for a couple of weeks. > > DanA, do you have the time and interest to take the lead. If not, anyone > else? > > If any TAG members feel this is a bad use of time, speak up, or I'll just > move ahead. Maybe we'll slip a bit of discussion into today's call if it > fits. Thank you! > > Noah > > On 9/23/2010 8:05 AM, Appelquist, Daniel, VF-Group wrote: >> This is diabolical. It should be a wake-up call to us on Web privacy. >> >> Considering that many of the options listed are ³part of HTML5,² Iım most >> worried that HTML5 could become associated with a lack of privacy. If >> anything, the reverse should be true: we (w3c& web standards community) >> should work to ensure that the HTML5 ³brand² stands for _enhanced_ privacy. >> >> Dan >> >> On 22/09/2010 09:49, "Noah Mendelsohn"<nrm@arcanedomain.com> wrote: >> >>> Following up on [1], I note this [2]: >>> >>> " evercookie is a javascript API available that produces >>> extremely persistent cookies in a browser. Its goal >>> is to identify a client even after they've removed standard >>> cookies, Flash cookies (Local Shared Objects or LSOs), and >>> others. >>> >>> evercookie accomplishes this by storing the cookie data in >>> several types of storage mechanisms that are available on >>> the local browser. Additionally, if evercookie has found the >>> user has removed any of the types of cookies in question, it >>> recreates them using each mechanism available. >>> >>> Specifically, when creating a new cookie, it uses the >>> following storage mechanisms when available: >>> - Standard HTTP Cookies >>> - Local Shared Objects (Flash Cookies) >>> - Storing cookies in RGB values of auto-generated, force-cached >>> PNGs using HTML5 Canvas tag to read pixels (cookies) back out >>> - Storing cookies in Web History (seriously. see FAQ) >>> - HTML5 Session Storage >>> - HTML5 Local Storage >>> - HTML5 Global Storage >>> - HTML5 Database Storage via SQLite" >>> >>> Noah >>> >>> >>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Sep/0029.html >>> [2] http://samy.pl/evercookie/ >>> >>> >
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Thursday, 23 September 2010 14:28:20 UTC