Yes to both.

FedCM-only: The identity handler SW is only dispatched for FedCM 
credentialed endpoint requests (accounts, id_assertion, disconnect). 
Regular visits/requests to the IDP origin are unaffected — the SW is 
registered with a FedCM-specific association, so it doesn't intercept 
normal navigations or fetches. FedCM-initiated only: The SW only receives 
IdentityRequestEvents dispatched by the browser's FedCM flow. It does not 
intercept arbitrary browser-initiated requests (e.g., cookie-credentialed 
fetches, navigations) to the IDP origin.
On Monday, April 13, 2026 at 10:23:49 PM UTC+5:30 Chris Thompson wrote:

> From a web platform security perspective, this seems reasonable but a 
> couple of questions as you begin working on implementation:
>
>    1. Is the FedCM SW only used for FedCM and not regular visits/requests 
>    to the IdP origin?
>    2. Is the FedCM SW only used for FedCM-initiated requests, not all 
>    browser-initiated requests to the IdP origin?
>
> If we could ensure those two points, that would help simplify how to 
> reason about these SWs (and might mitigate some potential "cross-protocol" 
> type vulnerabilities).
>
> Cheers,
> - Chris
>
> On Thursday, April 2, 2026 at 10:59:50 AM UTC-7 Chromestatus wrote:
>
>> *Contact emails*
>> [email protected]
>>
>> *Explainer*
>> https://github.com/w3c-fedid/FedCM/pull/815
>>
>> *Specification*
>> *No information provided* 
>>
>> *Summary*
>> Implement the FedCM Identity Handler, which allows Identity Providers 
>> (IDPs) to declare a Service Worker in their config.json that intercepts 
>> credentialed FedCM requests (accounts, id_assertion, disconnect). 
>> Currently, FedCM fetches to IDP endpoints (accounts, token, disconnect) are 
>> made directly by the browser with no opportunity for the IDP to augment the 
>> request. This prevents IDPs from: - Adding DPoP (Demonstration of 
>> Proof-of-Possession) proof headers - Performing client-side token 
>> enrichment or transformation - Implementing custom caching strategies for 
>> account responses - Adding attestation or other security headers to 
>> credentialed requests The Identity Handler allows IDPs to register a 
>> Service Worker that receives an `identityrequest` event for each FedCM 
>> endpoint call, enabling request augmentation before it reaches the IDP 
>> server. On failure, the browser transparently falls back to normal network 
>> fetch. Issue : https://github.com/w3c-fedid/FedCM/issues/80 
>>
>> *Blink component*
>> Blink>Identity>FedCM 
>> <https://issues.chromium.org/issues?q=customfield1222907:%22Blink%3EIdentity%3EFedCM%22>
>>
>> *Web Feature ID*
>> fedcm <https://webstatus.dev/features/fedcm> 
>>
>> *Motivation*
>> https://github.com/w3c-fedid/FedCM/issues/80 
>>
>> *Initial public proposal*
>> *No information provided*
>>
>> *Goals for experimentation*
>> None
>>
>> *Requires code in //chrome?*
>> False
>>
>> *Estimated milestones*
>>
>> No milestones specified
>>
>>
>> *Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status*
>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5096917819326464?gate=6247307227037696
>>
>> *Links to previous Intent discussions*
>> Intent to Prototype: 
>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/69ceae01.050a0220.1c79a0.01ae.GAE%40google.com
>>
>>
>> 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 visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/db8432a6-1ef3-4227-9074-82922323d789n%40chromium.org.

Reply via email to