You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
But there's discussion of potentially requiring a user-prompt for some of the more privacy-sensitive bits. Since the privacy model may be very different for, say, the "brand" and the minor version number, don't we need some ability to request some of the information but not others. I.e. perhaps each property should return it's own promise? That also makes it easier to reason about which data is being used by which sites (i.e. measure the compat risk of breaking/freezing just one field).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I like it! Having the individual getters return Promises (or not) jives with @foolip's comment on #28 (comment). It will enable us to have stricter control on some bits of information but not others, without defining a separate getLowEntropyUserAgentData function.
The proposal suggests this API:
But there's discussion of potentially requiring a user-prompt for some of the more privacy-sensitive bits. Since the privacy model may be very different for, say, the "brand" and the minor version number, don't we need some ability to request some of the information but not others. I.e. perhaps each property should return it's own promise? That also makes it easier to reason about which data is being used by which sites (i.e. measure the compat risk of breaking/freezing just one field).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: