New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 901827 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: Fixed
Owner:
Closed: Nov 19
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: 2018-11-12
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Feature
Launch-Privacy: Yes
Launch-Security: Yes
Launch-UI: NA



Sign in to add a comment

Extension API Modification: Add service workers and cache storage to browsingData.remove api

Project Member Reported by dullweber@chromium.org, Nov 5

Issue description

Extension API Modification Proposal

API Namespace: browsingData
API Owners: dullweber@, chrome-privacy-core@

API Overview Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dhF4FJ22bF8c6Gy4JyfB6Ke74hJOtityPr6CvK41daQ/edit?usp=sharing
I don't know if there is an existing api doc for browsingData.

Add browsingData.removeServiceWorkers and browsingData.removeCacheStorage functions.

 
Description: Show this description
Labels: -Launch-Privacy-NotReviewed -Launch-UI-NotReviewed -Launch-Security-NotReviewed -Launch-API-NotReviewed Launch-API-ReviewRequested Launch-Privacy-ReviewRequested Launch-Security-ReviewRequested Launch-UI-ReviewRequested
Requesting reviews for this small proposal.

I don't think ui-review is neccessary as this doesn't affect any ui.
Cc: mea...@chromium.org
NextAction: 2018-11-12
Owner: rdevlin....@chromium.org
Status: Assigned (was: Untriaged)
Assigning to myself so I remember to take a look at this.
The NextAction date has arrived: 2018-11-12
Labels: -Launch-Security-ReviewRequested Launch-Security-Yes
No significant security risk in addition to what chrome.browsingData already has, lgtm.
Labels: -Launch-Privacy-ReviewRequested Launch-Privacy-Yes
LGTM2.

chrome.browsingData already covers several web-facing storage mechanisms (e.g. cookies, local storage, indexed db). Not supporting all such storage mechanisms actually makes it ineffective at its task (as the extensions currently can't clear all of user's data and protect them from tracking), which means this addition is privacy-positive.
Cc: chrome-extensions-security-eng@google.com
Labels: -Launch-UI-ReviewRequested -Launch-API-ReviewRequested Launch-API-Yes Launch-UI-NA
API LGTM.  +crx security FYI.
Status: Fixed (was: Assigned)
Thanks everyone. 

I'm not sure about the launch process for extensions.
This is just a small change to an existing API, so I guess a waterfall roll-out is fine and I can just close this bug?

Sign in to add a comment