LGTM1 to deprecate and remove.
Please roll out the removal carefully. I'd similarly be surprised if the
removal causes breakage, but I have been surprised before, so.. :)

On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 6:41 PM Emily Stark <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 9:34 AM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> What deprecation/removal timelines did you have in mind?
>>
>
> Since there's no user-visible impact, I was hoping to do a console message
> in M105 and then remove in M106.
>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 6:31 PM Emily Stark <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Contact [email protected]
>>>
>>> ExplainerNone
>>>
>>> Specificationhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9163
>>>
>>> Summary
>>>
>>> Expect-CT is an HTTP header that allowed websites to opt in to
>>> Certificate Transparency enforcement before it was enforced by default. It
>>> also has reporting functionality to help developers discover CT
>>> misconfigurations.
>>>
>>>
>>> Blink componentInternals>Network>DomainSecurityPolicy
>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Internals%3ENetwork%3EDomainSecurityPolicy>
>>>
>>> Motivation
>>>
>>> Expect-CT was designed to help transition to universal Certificate
>>> Transparency (CT) enforcement, by allowing high-value websites to opt in to
>>> CT enforcement/reporting for better security before CT enforcement was
>>> required (by Chrome) on all public websites. However, Expect-CT has now
>>> outlived its usefulness. Chrome requires CT on all public websites now, so
>>> there is no security value to Expect-CT anymore. Expect-CT was also
>>> designed to help site owners discover CT-related misconfigurations;
>>> however, now that CT is universally required, CT is generally configured in
>>> websites' certificates by certificate authorities and virtually never
>>> configured by individual site owners, thus Expect-CT has very limited value
>>> as a misconfiguration/debugging tool anymore either. No other browser has
>>> implemented Expect-CT so removing it is not an interoperability concern.
>>>
>>>
>>> Initial public proposal
>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/tgn5R-58iek/m/Q6YCnu0RFQAJ
>>>
>>> TAG reviewn/a
>>>
>>> TAG review statusNot applicable
>>>
>>> Risks
>>>
>>>
>>> Interoperability and Compatibility
>>>
>>>
>>> No other browser has implemented Expect-CT or given signals that they
>>> intend to (to my knowledge). Expect-CT is not user-visible so removing the
>>> feature has no compatibility risk. Developers who are currently sending the
>>> header should stop doing so just to save the bytes on the wire.
>>>
>>> While the header is served on a large percent of requests (~6%), this is
>>> likely due to a small number of large providers that can be informed of the
>>> deprecation via 1:1 outreach.
>>>
>>
>> Are you planning to wait for usage to drop as a result of this outreach?
>> Or are you fairly confident that removing will not break content due to
>> some weird server side reliance on the header?
>>
>
> I would be very very surprised if the removal caused any breakage, so I
> think we can go ahead with the removal without waiting for usage to drop.
> The outreach is really just a heads-up to allow websites to save some bytes
> on serving the header and turn down any infrastructure they have in place
> for receiving reports, but the feature is essentially a no-op right now so
> removing it shouldn't cause any breakage.
>
>
>>
>>
>>> As described above, the header serves no security value any longer,
>>> removing it will have no user-visible effects, and the header provides
>>> extremely minimal debugging value to developers since developers are no
>>> longer responsible for serving their own CT information (100.00% of
>>> requests serve CT information directly embedded in the certificate, which
>>> developers are not responsible for configuring).
>>>
>>> *Gecko*: No signal
>>>
>>> *WebKit*: No signal
>>>
>>> *Web developers*: No signals
>>>
>>> *Other signals*:
>>>
>>> WebView application risks
>>>
>>> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such
>>> that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Debuggability
>>>
>>> We'll add a console message informing developers that the header
>>> will/has no effect and they should remove it.
>>>
>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests
>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>
>>> ?No
>>>
>>> Flag name
>>>
>>> Requires code in //chrome?False
>>>
>>> Estimated milestones
>>>
>>> No milestones specified
>>>
>>>
>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status
>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/6244547273687040
>>>
>>> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status
>>> <https://chromestatus.com/>.
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "blink-dev" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAPP_2SbFjjX-AEv7bUEqOcgp8JTy5t9CoYHproGe0WkJGSY3Pg%40mail.gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAPP_2SbFjjX-AEv7bUEqOcgp8JTy5t9CoYHproGe0WkJGSY3Pg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfWPRsmX5O9pxzVkXCqWDqtTQwWkO0b-2EHh-1ZC5A6LzA%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to