Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CHIPS and the Path attribute #47

Closed
DCtheTall opened this issue Jul 18, 2022 · 2 comments
Closed

CHIPS and the Path attribute #47

DCtheTall opened this issue Jul 18, 2022 · 2 comments

Comments

@DCtheTall
Copy link
Collaborator

When CHIPS was initially proposed, we required that the __Host- name prefix be included. This prefix is already part of the cookie RFC and requires the following:

  • The cookie is set with the Secure attribute.
  • The cookie is set without the Domain attribute.
  • The cookie is set with the Path=/ attribute.

Due to concerns raised in #30, Chrome removed the __Host- name prefix requirement from CHIPS. Likewise, due to concerns raised in #39 and #43 we decided to remove the no-Domain requirement as well.

Given we have diverged the Partitioned behavior from the __Host- prefix behavior, I am opening this issue to prompt a discussion on whether we should continue to include or do away with the Path=/ attribute as well.

@DCtheTall
Copy link
Collaborator Author

DCtheTall commented Jul 29, 2022

Recap of the points from yesterday's PrivacyCG call:

  • Reps from Firefox think that the Path=/ requirement is not necessary.
  • Reps from Firefox and Edge were asking about the Secure requirement as well.
    • Chrome replied that there is a security and privacy benefit to not letting partitioned cookies be sent over plaintext.
  • Baycloud mentioned some sites use the Path attribute in cookies to separate out cookies set in different countries to satisfy different language or legal requirements.

I think we made good progress, and I think it is reasonable to say there is alignment that the Path=/ requirement is not necessary for CHIPS and may make adoption more difficult.

@DCtheTall
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Closing this now that #49 has landed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants