SGTM!

meacer/nparker, do you know who would be best to implement experimentally and check metrics?

meacer -- How about starting this in Q1?

What's the metric that we should track? Is the idea to not increase CTR while making the "learn more" link more accessible? 

Yep, exactly.

Got it. Though I'm wondering if it's overkill to run an experiment, as I'm not sure why making the link more accessible would increase the CTR (then again that's what the study is for, I guess?)

Is there a particular CTR increasing scenario we are worried that might occur?

Yeah, I have no idea. I just didn't want there to be adverse effects. There is no specific scenario. Maybe this is just "do a finchable rollout so we can revert if things look bad during rollout"

Do we have a mock?

Another metrics is the visitation to the Chrome Privacy Whitepaper. We are currently getting 5M a day, and the users stay only for a minute on the Whitepaper. We should start to get the numbers showing that users who visited the Whitepaper are not sent there because the Whitepaper is the first link on the interstitial.

Not an official mock, but I suppose we want something like learn-more-mock.png

Also, is the privacy whitepaper this one?:
https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/privacy/whitepaper.html?hl=en-US#extendedreport

If so, it's already the first link when the SafeBrowsing extended reporting checkbox is displayed (not sure if it's always displayed). The Learn More link is a different one that takes the user to Help Center and 

We also have two links pointing to similar but different pages. Is that expected?
- Automatically report points to the privacy whitepaper.
- Privacy policy points to 
https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/privacy/?hl=en-US#safe-browsing-policies

Deleted: learn-more-mock.png 34.1 KB

	learn-more-mock.png 34.1 KB View Download

Deleted: privacy-link.png 34.1 KB

	privacy-link.png 34.1 KB View Download

The fact that "Learn more" is written with larger text, and placed before the checkbox is a already an improvement. I'd be happy to see if this creates any good results before we make any more changes.

Do we also want to do this for SafeBrowsing interstitials?

Yes I think we should do the same to SB and SSL interstitials.  We'll want to measure the results for each separately.

I keep coming back to this and can't convince myself that a finch trial is necessary for a small change such as this. It seems like pointing more users to help pages is always a win and that we should just do this without trials. In the worst case we can just revert the change. Should we just do it?

I also propose combining "Automatically report" and "Privacy policy" links into one to avoid link proliferation, if that's a concern.

I don't think we can combine the links, I think that was a privacy/legal requirement from earlier.

Mustafa, would you be able to put these mocks plus similar for SB into a deck so we can send to UI? I think it should be straightforward.

+ a few more who think about interstitials, FYI!

[+srahim our UX writer for guidance]

A couple of notes:
+ We currently have 'Find out more' as the link text, should it be changed to something more explicit - The article is titled - 'Fix connection errors'. I would think a user is more likely to click through if it was more solution orientated. 'Learn more' feels so generic that moving the link to the end of a paragraph probably wouldn't increase CTR by much. 

+ Capitalisation 'Learn More' -> 'Learn more'

The two links unfortunately cannot be combined. One is an actual legal "contract" about the data we collect, and one is a technical doc expanding on details of the data and why.

But I do recognize that this is a tiny box but contains a lot of links. Privacy will be ok to copy a tiny one-line snippet of what's contained in the privacy whitepaper (see link below) that explains what data is included in the extended report, and then we can remove the link.

https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/privacy/whitepaper.html#extendedreport

Will UX be ok with the proposal? This may take a while to settle. So fro now we are fine with the mock in comment 10.

Our UX writer srahim has been OOO so would like to wait until she's had a chance to look at the strings first.

UI review deck is at go/crbug_674732. I'll simply move the link for now.

Awesome, I updated the deck a bit to include motivation/goals. Could you confirm exactly what has changed on the deck?

On some longish domains the "Learn more" link and the error code falls into the same line and it looks crowded, so I moved the error code to the next line. Does this LGTY?

Deleted: learn_more_same_line.png 39.4 KB

	learn_more_same_line.png 39.4 KB View Download

Deleted: learn_more_new_line.png 40.5 KB

	learn_more_new_line.png 40.5 KB View Download

Putting the error code on the new line is a good change, thanks for catching that. Please also remove the period after "Learn more". 

Let's keep "Learn more" for now. It's a standard and users have come to understand that they'll get a help center article when they click a Learn more link.

Regarding the opt-in text, it sounds like there are two versions that both show depending on the user. 
Original "Report details of possible security incidents to Google" text
New "Automatically send some system information and page content to Google to help detect dangerous apps and sites"  

Are we looking to change either or both or none for this bug? 

srahim: Thanks!

The new string is for Scout feature and it changes based on Finch ( bug 692649 ). I'm not planning to modify those strings in this change.

The following revision refers to this bug:
  https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/b9eec19bd79f6e7018f5dfdda37e54a37c4c0dd1

commit b9eec19bd79f6e7018f5dfdda37e54a37c4c0dd1
Author: meacer <meacer@chromium.org>
Date: Thu Apr 27 00:27:27 2017

Move learn more link to the main section in security interstitials

BUG= 674732 

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2846673002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#467525}

[modify] https://crrev.com/b9eec19bd79f6e7018f5dfdda37e54a37c4c0dd1/components/security_interstitials/core/browser/resources/interstitial_v2.css
[modify] https://crrev.com/b9eec19bd79f6e7018f5dfdda37e54a37c4c0dd1/components/security_interstitials_strings.grdp
[modify] https://crrev.com/b9eec19bd79f6e7018f5dfdda37e54a37c4c0dd1/components/ssl_errors_strings.grdp

Do we have a way to measure whether this is working or not, aside from measuring harm with CTR? A few ideas:

- How often people click on the link
- # of ConOps reports relating to interstitials (once this is on stable)

I gave Conops a heads up earlier today. We also have interstitial.xyz.interaction histograms which record link clicks.

in terms of the interactions, what would we consider a success? increase of 10%? 20%? 50%?

I don't think we set a success criteria other than not regressing the CTR. I'd consider any increase in learn more clicks a success since it potentially leads the user to fix their error.

The following revision refers to this bug:
  https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/80ca9270c0de1eb57260a76d1d91caecf6bfc47e

commit 80ca9270c0de1eb57260a76d1d91caecf6bfc47e
Author: ntfschr <ntfschr@chromium.org>
Date: Fri Apr 28 18:42:51 2017

Check for learn-more-link before clicking details

The "learn more" link has moved to the main content instead of the
details. Tests should check for it before clicking the details, since
mobile layouts will hide the main content after "details" is clicked.

BUG= 674732 

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2845363003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#468073}

[modify] https://crrev.com/80ca9270c0de1eb57260a76d1d91caecf6bfc47e/chrome/browser/safe_browsing/safe_browsing_blocking_page_test.cc