Skip to content

Post TPAC Update #22

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 1, 2024
Merged

Post TPAC Update #22

merged 2 commits into from
Oct 1, 2024

Conversation

benjaminsavage
Copy link
Contributor

At TPAC, we discussed a few changes to this spec:

  1. Using "filterData" instead of enumerating a list of ad identifiers. For now, the proposal was to use the simplest approach of a single integer.
  2. Storing information in the impression store about the script which invoked the saveImpression API, which might be a 3rd party script, and might be within an iframe. This could later be used for impression filtering and in the future, as a breakdown key.
  3. Providing the maximum conversion value to the device in the saveImpression call as it will be used to deduct appropriate privacy budget loss.

At TPAC, we discussed a few changes to this spec:
1. Using "filterData" instead of enumerating a list of ad identifiers. For now, the proposal was to use the simplest approach of a single integer.
2. Storing information in the impression store about the script which invoked the saveImpression API, which might be a 3rd party script, and might be within an iframe. This could later be used for impression filtering and in the future, as a breakdown key.
3. Providing the maximum conversion value to the device in the saveImpression call as it will be used to deduct appropriate privacy budget loss.
Copy link
Member

@martinthomson martinthomson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A few holes, but this is good.

@@ -482,13 +483,11 @@ The arguments to <a method for=PrivateAttribution>saveImpression()</a> are as fo
[=impression=] with a subsequent [=conversion=], the [=conversion value=]
will be added to the histogram bucket identified by this index.
</dd>
<dt><dfn>ad</dfn></dt>
<dt><dfn>filterData</dfn></dt>
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder whether we might find a different name for this. Issue?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

#24

Comment on lines +613 to +616
The maximum [=conversion value=] across all contributions included in the aggregation.
Together with epsilon, this is used to calibrate the distribution of random noise that
will be added to the outcome. It is also used to determine the amount of [=privacy budget=]
to expend on this [=conversion report=].
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder whether we should set this to value if unspecified. That means that we'd need something else. I'd need to research how to do that properly within WebIDL though... Issue?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

#25

Comment on lines +626 to +627
A list of sites which called the [=saveImpression=] API. Only [=impressions=] recorded by scripts originating from one of the
intermediary sites are eligible to match this [=conversion=].
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We need to connect this to the "iframe site domain" piece better than this does presently. Issue?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

#26

@benjaminsavage benjaminsavage merged commit 532184c into main Oct 1, 2024
1 check failed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants