Tracking Protection Working Group Teleconference

01 Oct 2014

See also: IRC log


rvaneijk, [FTC], hefferjr, npdoty, Wendy, +322548aaaa, justin, eberkower, ChrisPedigoOPA, moneill2
schunter, fielding, dsinger, wileys, johnsimpson


<trackbot> Date: 01 October 2014

<npdoty> volunteer to scribe?

<scribe> scribenick: wseltzer

Justin: this will be a short meeting
... identify what people think we still need to discuss on TCS
... Only two related issues I know about, ISSUE-24 and ISSUE-235

trackbot, ISSUE-24?

<trackbot> ISSUE-24 -- Possible exemption for fraud detection and defense -- pending review

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/24

justin: we were close to consensus on 24, and then Shane noted an objection re: graduated response

trackbot, ISSUE-235?

<trackbot> ISSUE-235 -- Auditability requirement in Reasonable Security section -- raised

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/235

justin: related issue-235, auditability

<npdoty> I don't think graduated response was actually required in the acceptable text. just preferred.

justin: proposal from Jack, strike language re: make sure use of data is auditable,
... Shane objected to any reference to graduated response
... Take to mailing list.
... Does anyone want to run with Jack's issue, given he's no longer participating?
... Or do we let it slide?
... I've gone through rest of issues, and don't in personal opinion see things we need to discuss.
... Anyone else have a read-through?

<npdoty> does anyone know what the argument was about auditability? is that unlikely to be implemented?

<justin> issue-32?

<trackbot> issue-32 -- Sharing of data between entities via cookie syncing / identity brokering -- pending review

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/32

npdoty: I haven't necessarily done a full audit, but a few updates
... I've marked pending-review the things I've addressed
... A few I'm not sure what to do
... e.g. personalization, defining new terms re browsing history
... these might just be editorial

justin: If we're not going to use a term, no point in defining it
... so we can drop web browsing history

<npdoty> +1, don't need to define terms that we don't use.

rvaneijk: Separate issue: data append
... I was reviewing proposals on 3d-party compliance

<npdoty> thanks, rvaneijk, for looking at those proposals in detail

rvaneijk: Is data append still a separate issue, or accounted for in what text?

justin: we had a cfo on data append, and I think we decided not to add language prohibiting data append
... schunter drafted, I haven't yet reviewed

<rvaneijk> ok, fair

<npdoty> https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/170

justin: We announced the decision, that proposal to add prohibition on data append faced strong objections
... A couple Euro-specific issues I'm not sure what to do with

<npdoty> which I think is now currently reflected in the editor's draft, and would be present in either of the issue-203 responses

justin: a definition of DNT:0, an additional tracking header

rvaneijk: We expressed from Article 29 that we were looking for technical building blocks
... most coming together
... if it's tied ot specific issues, probably ok

justin: these may be TPE issues

<npdoty> http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_DNT_0

npdoty: we have a change proposal on DNT:0, dwainberg suggested we remove text

justin: I think Jonathan's language is tautological. can go to the group

<npdoty> I was fine with the existing text

justin: I haven't gone through change proposals. Will do after the call to see if anyone wants to pursue it.

<justin> issue-200

<trackbot> issue-200 -- Transitive exceptions -- open

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/200

<npdoty> I understand dwainberg's proposal as being related to not having a sufficient definition, but hopefully the work on defining tracking has resolved that concern

justin: one other issue, David Singer was working on, transitive exceptions
... don't recall the state

npdoty: I think the tracker had it in compliance-next
... not urgent

<justin> issue-32?

<trackbot> issue-32 -- Sharing of data between entities via cookie syncing / identity brokering -- pending review

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/32

justin: two other issues
... old one (2011) cookie syncing
... whether we need specific language? my inclination is it should be clear without

<justin> issue-223?

<trackbot> issue-223 -- Define criteria now for the test/implementation phase of the compliance spec -- raised

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/223

justin: dwainberg raised this issue-223

npdoty: as a reminder, when we get to Candidate Recommendation phase, we call for implementatoins
... then at the end of that phase, we test the implementations for compliance
... we should take it up in CR, not now
... David might have had a different idea, but the purpose of testing is to see whether there are implementations

<npdoty> since some things are done through internal systems, testing implementations from the outside may be non-trivial

justin: Do folks have other issues against TCS?

<npdoty> I've seen WGs in the past use privacy policies, or statements from companies, to evaluate whether a spec is being implemented

justin: otherwise, I'll send a note to the list that the only open issues are reasonable security and potentially auditability
... Next week, back to closing out TPE
... potentially a few TCS issues

<npdoty> reminders

<npdoty> Audience Measurement Call for Objections closes October 9th.

<npdoty> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/49311/tpwg-audience-25/

justin: Hope to have all outstanding issues on TPE addressed
... there are open CFOs: audience measurement, closing in 8 days
... deidentification closed

<rvaneijk> nice

justin: only objections to the Jack Hobaugh proposal, no objections to the language we'd worked out on the call
... thanks.

<rvaneijk> safe travels


trackbot, end teleconf

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.138 (CVS log)
$Date: 2014-10-01 16:21:31 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138  of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found ScribeNick: wseltzer
Inferring Scribes: wseltzer

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.

Default Present: rvaneijk, [FTC], hefferjr, npdoty, Wendy, +322548aaaa, justin, eberkower, ChrisPedigoOPA, moneill2
Present: rvaneijk [FTC] hefferjr npdoty Wendy +322548aaaa justin eberkower ChrisPedigoOPA moneill2
Regrets: schunter fielding dsinger wileys johnsimpson
Found Date: 01 Oct 2014
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/10/01-dnt-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]