va...@chromium.org, ah...@chromium.org, gde...@chromium.org
https://github.com/WebAssembly/spec/issues/1303
In the long run this will help to isolate sites based on the origin instead of the site
https://github.com/WICG/origin-agent-cluster#how-it-works
https://github.com/mikewest/deprecating-document-domain
Yes
WebAssembly module sharing between cross-origin but same-site environments will be deprecated to allow agent clusters to be scoped to origins long term. This change will be performed via a WebAssembly spec change, which has an impact on the other embedders incl. Browser vendors as well. All of them have been involved in the discussions and no objections have been raised.
I’ve two asks (details below):
Can we add the depreciation warning in DevTools to M93 (now)
Can we deprecate the feature in M95.
Blink>JavaScript>WebAssembly
Blink>SecurityFeature
Overall document.domain discussion: https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/564
No interoperability risks.
Compatibility risk is small as Wasm is a new-er technology and the adoption is in general lower as for JS APIs. UseCounters show ~0.000151% of page visits making use of this feature, whereby 0.0139% of page visits share Wasm modules at all. We’ve detailed UKM metrics in place and are planning to reach out to top users as soon as we’ve LGTMs for the plan.
Gecko: Positive Browser vendor is part of the WebAssembly community group and engaged within the spec discussion. Ok with overall document.domain deprecation direction. Skeptical if they could pull it off in advance of the document.domain deprecating.
WebKit: Neutral (no objections raised) - Browser vendor is part of the WebAssembly community group and engaged within the spec discussion
Web developers: Neutral - In case the same module can be used cross origin, it needs to be server 2x times. This has definitely an performance impact, but we’re confident that the security benefits are overweighting this issue.
M93 - Add the devtools issue and warning
M94 - Monitor usa counters and add an enterprise policy to extend the usage if needed
M95 - Deprecate the feature by default. No reverse origin trial is planned for now, but might be added in case it’s requested.
This change should be security-positive, since Wasm modules can only be shared within the same origin any more.
A deprecation warning will be added to DevTools console and to the issues panel in M93, which will support current users to adopt. This warning will file a depreciation report as well using the Reporting API, if so configured.
Yes
Are in place to test the current functionality, and will be adjusted within the M95 timeframe.
Contact emails
va...@chromium.org, ah...@chromium.org, gde...@chromium.org
Specification
https://github.com/WebAssembly/spec/issues/1303
In the long run this will help to isolate sites based on the origin instead of the site
https://github.com/WICG/origin-agent-cluster#how-it-works
https://github.com/mikewest/deprecating-document-domain
API spec
Yes
Summary
WebAssembly module sharing between cross-origin but same-site environments will be deprecated to allow agent clusters to be scoped to origins long term.
This change will be performed via a WebAssembly spec change, which has an impact on the other embedders incl. Browser vendors as well. All of them have been involved in the discussions and no objections have been raised.
I’ve two asks (details below):
Can we add the depreciation warning in DevTools to M93 (now)
Can we deprecate the feature in M95.
Blink component
Blink>JavaScript>WebAssembly
Blink>SecurityFeature
TAG review
Overall document.domain discussion: https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/564
Risks
Interoperability and Compatibility
No interoperability risks.
Compatibility risk is small as Wasm is a new-er technology and the adoption is in general lower as for JS APIs. UseCounters show ~0.000151% of page visits making use of this feature, whereby 0.0139% of page visits share Wasm modules at all. We’ve detailed UKM metrics in place and are planning to reach out to top users as soon as we’ve LGTMs for the plan.
Gecko: Positive Browser vendor is part of the WebAssembly community group and engaged within the spec discussion. Ok with overall document.domain deprecation direction. Skeptical if they could pull it off in advance of the document.domain deprecating.
WebKit: Neutral (no objections raised) - Browser vendor is part of the WebAssembly community group and engaged within the spec discussion
I'd love to better understand what would actually happen here? If 2 origins on the same site currently share a WASM module, will they simply re-download the module in question? Or will they break unless they change their content?
On Monday, July 5, 2021 at 9:12:41 AM UTC+2 Lutz Vahl wrote:Contact emails
va...@chromium.org, ah...@chromium.org, gde...@chromium.org
Specification
https://github.com/WebAssembly/spec/issues/1303
In the long run this will help to isolate sites based on the origin instead of the site
https://github.com/WICG/origin-agent-cluster#how-it-works
https://github.com/mikewest/deprecating-document-domain
API spec
Yes
Summary
WebAssembly module sharing between cross-origin but same-site environments will be deprecated to allow agent clusters to be scoped to origins long term.
Is there an explainer you could point me to on how WASM module sharing currently works?This change will be performed via a WebAssembly spec change, which has an impact on the other embedders incl. Browser vendors as well. All of them have been involved in the discussions and no objections have been raised.
I’ve two asks (details below):
Can we add the depreciation warning in DevTools to M93 (now)
Can we deprecate the feature in M95.
You mean remove in M95?
Blink component
Blink>JavaScript>WebAssembly
Blink>SecurityFeature
TAG review
Overall document.domain discussion: https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/564
Risks
Interoperability and Compatibility
No interoperability risks.
Are other vendors committed to follow?
Compatibility risk is small as Wasm is a new-er technology and the adoption is in general lower as for JS APIs. UseCounters show ~0.000151% of page visits making use of this feature, whereby 0.0139% of page visits share Wasm modules at all. We’ve detailed UKM metrics in place and are planning to reach out to top users as soon as we’ve LGTMs for the plan.
See my question above on what would happen in such sharing cases.
Gecko: Positive Browser vendor is part of the WebAssembly community group and engaged within the spec discussion. Ok with overall document.domain deprecation direction. Skeptical if they could pull it off in advance of the document.domain deprecating.
Any links to discussions?
WebKit: Neutral (no objections raised) - Browser vendor is part of the WebAssembly community group and engaged within the spec discussion
Links to discussions? Have you requested a signal? (bit.ly/blink-signals)
Web developers: Neutral - In case the same module can be used cross origin, it needs to be server 2x times. This has definitely an performance impact, but we’re confident that the security benefits are overweighting this issue.
Activation - Deprecation plan
M93 - Add the devtools issue and warning
M94 - Monitor usa counters and add an enterprise policy to extend the usage if needed
M95 - Deprecate the feature by default. No reverse origin trial is planned for now, but might be added in case it’s requested.
Security
This change should be security-positive, since Wasm modules can only be shared within the same origin any more.
Debuggability
A deprecation warning will be added to DevTools console and to the issues panel in M93, which will support current users to adopt. This warning will file a depreciation report as well using the Reporting API, if so configured.
Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)?
Yes
Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests?
Are in place to test the current functionality, and will be adjusted within the M95 timeframe.
Tracking bug
Launch bug
Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status
https://chromestatus.com/feature/5650158039597056
--
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 blink-dev+...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/66960e21-da5a-4b49-881d-82f5001f5d23n%40chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAH0ixBP3%2BbRTN3dpk71BFQdC%3Dmtmb6jA3RUtW%3Dq83CKRG0n%2BmQ%40mail.gmail.com.
Hi Yoav, thanks for the input, CILOn Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 1:48 PM Yoav Weiss <yoav...@chromium.org> wrote:I'd love to better understand what would actually happen here? If 2 origins on the same site currently share a WASM module, will they simply re-download the module in question? Or will they break unless they change their content?In that case they need to adjust/change their site to re-download the model. Because of this we'd like to raise the deprecation warning already in M93.
LGTM1 to deprecate based on the 0.000724% usage number (higher than when you filed the intent but still low enough that I don't think the deprecation will add noise, and low enough that it's very possible to later successfully execute this change).
/Daniel
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAH0ixBNP2LfQofXarqM5SGmXXH-UD_Q74xV%3Diy%2Bt3jQQqCARBw%40mail.gmail.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/6eb5c2cd-153a-98b2-1b72-3b2020b7d0a4%40igalia.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw-uszeA%3DYwoXwz6aumkM-%3DM089ndJ8JYmF9aVpWqtj96Q%40mail.gmail.com.
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/topic/blink-dev/nhmP8A61xk8/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAH0ixBPEe2KPayQ03wjDqYZDQeVb7hh3aXvd5nymrOsK0yr5SA%40mail.gmail.com.