Specify the mode API #660

tttzach · 2024-10-02T19:35:32Z

spec/index.bs

cbiesinger

Generally looks good. See comments below. We should probably add a Note: in some appropriate place that the user agent should consider displaying the account chooser in a louder way if mode is active.

spec/index.bs

TallTed

Minor, human-facing

spec/index.bs

TallTed

trivial, editorial

spec/index.bs

Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>

cbiesinger

Thanks, looks good modulo two minor comments

spec/index.bs

Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>

wseltzer · 2024-10-15T15:21:49Z

Discussed in Oct. 15 call. [minutes to be linked]
https://github.com/fedidcg/meetings/blob/main/2024/2024-10-15-notes.md

tttzach · 2024-10-15T15:24:47Z

@aaronpk @bvandersloot-mozilla @philsmart Please take a look!

spec/index.bs

philsmart · 2024-10-15T16:47:30Z

From the perspective of at least the R&E federations I am involved with, 'active' mode is a better fit. This mode supports authentication with Identity Providers (IdPs) that the user has not yet logged into (as signalled by the login status API).

Supporting multiple IdPs in 'active' mode would be helpful, but it could result in the same account fetching issues as enabling multi-IdP in 'passive' mode. The 'passive' mode addressed this (if I recall correctly) by including only the IdPs you've signed into, which brings us back to the same issue (unable to use an IdP you've not logged into). This can be addressed for now by using an external IdP discovery service and populating FedCM with a single IdP in 'active' mode.

For what it's worth, I agree with renaming 'button' and 'widget' to 'active' and 'passive', it is clearer.

spec/index.bs

npm1 · 2024-10-21T17:21:14Z

spec/index.bs

+    1. Let |mode| be |options|'s {{IdentityCredentialRequestOptions/mode}}.
+    1. If |mode| is [=active=]
+        1. If [=transient activation=] is not present, return (failure, true).
+        1. If [=transient activation=] is present and there is a pending


This part about pending request is also not precise enough. Presumably this is also scoped to something (perhaps top-level browsing context?). In addition, you are never going to reach this because we disallow this from credential management in 8.2 https://w3c.github.io/webappsec-credential-management/#algorithm-request so that will need to be modified as well at some point

Good catch on the scoping... let me know if |W|'s top-level browsing context works or if that should be even more specific. Should modifying 8.2 be in this PR?

No, you cannot modify 8.2 in this PR since that is a separate repo. I also filed an issue because that uses the wrong scope as well. Need to think how to fix it while also allowing the active mode to be prioritized (eg supersede a pending passive mode request)

npm1 · 2024-10-21T17:21:40Z

spec/index.bs

+        1. If [=transient activation=] is present and there is a pending
+            request where |mode| is [=passive=], cancel the previous request
+            as if a {{CredentialRequestOptions/signal}} of
+            [=AbortSignal/aborted=] was given to it.


Hmm but isnt the abort signal only for the developer to use? This does not make sense to me, is this actually what we do?

No we don't actually use the abort signal for this case, but instead we directly reject the previous request. Though this was why its worded this way: #660 (comment)

Maybe we can get rid of as if a {{CredentialRequestOptions/signal}} of [=AbortSignal/aborted=] was given to it.?

spec/index.bs

bvandersloot-mozilla

why SHOULD?

hlflanagan · 2024-10-22T16:15:18Z

PR further discussed in https://github.com/w3c-fedid/meetings/blob/main/2024/2024-10-22-notes.md
(@bvandersloot-mozilla will review; the issue raised (w3c-fedid/active-mode#6) will be added to the text as a related problem that still needs to be solved)

tttzach

Thanks for the review, please take another look!

spec/index.bs

tttzach · 2024-10-23T16:27:36Z

spec/index.bs

+        1. If [=transient activation=] is present and there is a pending
+            request where |mode| is [=passive=], cancel the previous request
+            as if a {{CredentialRequestOptions/signal}} of
+            [=AbortSignal/aborted=] was given to it.


No we don't actually use the abort signal for this case, but instead we directly reject the previous request. Though this was why its worded this way: #660 (comment)

Maybe we can get rid of as if a {{CredentialRequestOptions/signal}} of [=AbortSignal/aborted=] was given to it.?

tttzach · 2024-10-23T16:28:21Z

spec/index.bs

+    1. Let |mode| be |options|'s {{IdentityCredentialRequestOptions/mode}}.
+    1. If |mode| is [=active=]
+        1. If [=transient activation=] is not present, return (failure, true).
+        1. If [=transient activation=] is present and there is a pending


Good catch on the scoping... let me know if |W|'s top-level browsing context works or if that should be even more specific. Should modifying 8.2 be in this PR?

spec/index.bs

npm1 · 2024-10-24T12:07:45Z

spec/index.bs

-            request where |mode| is [=passive=], cancel the previous request
-            as if a {{CredentialRequestOptions/signal}} of
-            [=AbortSignal/aborted=] was given to it.
+    1. Let |globalObject| be the [=current global object=].


I dont think there is a current global object while running in parallel? Why dont you just use the globalObject that is passed as a parameter to this algorithm?

npm1 · 2024-10-24T12:08:09Z

spec/index.bs

-            as if a {{CredentialRequestOptions/signal}} of
-            [=AbortSignal/aborted=] was given to it.
+    1. Let |globalObject| be the [=current global object=].
+    1. Let |W| be |globalObject|'s [=associated Window=].


Can be defined inside the active mode if since only used there?

npm1 · 2024-10-24T12:08:47Z

spec/index.bs

+    1. Let |W| be |globalObject|'s [=associated Window=].
+    1. If |mode| is [=active=]:
+        1. If |W| does not have [=transient activation=], return (failure, true).
+        1. Otherwise, and if there is a pending request on |W|'s top-level browsing


the top-level browsing context needs a link (and not sure if it is directly from Window or need to use Document). Also this is not clear, right now it makes it sound like we just check if top-level has a pending request whereas we would need to check all frames nested in that top-level. Can you rephrase this to make it clear?

npm1 · 2024-10-24T12:10:20Z

spec/index.bs

+    1. If |mode| is [=active=]:
+        1. If |W| does not have [=transient activation=], return (failure, true).
+        1. Otherwise, and if there is a pending request on |W|'s top-level browsing
+            context where |mode| is [=passive=], reject the previous request.


We need to say specifically what error is used for the rejection in this case, no?

npm1 · 2024-10-24T12:15:37Z

spec/index.bs

-                    [=fetch the config file=] and [=show an IDP login dialog=].
-
+                * If the user triggers this affordance:
+                    1. Let |config| be the result of running [=fetch the config file=]


I wonder if it would be better to encapsulate this in a helper function so as not to rewrite it?

Add mode for FedCM

ebc24fc

Fixes w3c-fedid/active-mode#2

samuelgoto reviewed Oct 2, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

cbiesinger reviewed Oct 2, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

spec/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

spec/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

spec/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

spec/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

TallTed suggested changes Oct 3, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

spec/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

yi-gu reviewed Oct 3, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/index.bs Show resolved Hide resolved

tttzach added 3 commits October 3, 2024 15:59

Update index.bs

4fd24da

Update index.bs

d34ecd0

Lint index.bs

ce8f11e

tttzach requested review from samuelgoto, cbiesinger and yi-gu October 3, 2024 22:55

tttzach changed the title ~~Add mode for FedCM~~ Specify the mode API Oct 4, 2024

TallTed suggested changes Oct 4, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Update spec/index.bs

2a28995

Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>

cbiesinger approved these changes Oct 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

spec/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Update index.bs

d8488b8

tttzach requested a review from bvandersloot-mozilla October 8, 2024 15:36

TallTed reviewed Oct 8, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Update spec/index.bs

1e0d0be

Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>

samuelgoto reviewed Oct 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/index.bs Show resolved Hide resolved

samuelgoto reviewed Oct 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

samuelgoto reviewed Oct 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

tttzach added 4 commits October 15, 2024 12:53

Update index.bs

a477975

Update index.bs

c4c3d5b

Update index.bs

400ac7f

Update index.bs

cbaa2d2

yi-gu approved these changes Oct 18, 2024

View reviewed changes

cbiesinger approved these changes Oct 21, 2024

View reviewed changes

npm1 requested changes Oct 21, 2024

View reviewed changes

bvandersloot-mozilla requested changes Oct 22, 2024

View reviewed changes

tttzach added 2 commits October 23, 2024 11:41

Update index.bs

0247dd2

Update index.bs

71e585b

tttzach commented Oct 23, 2024

View reviewed changes

tttzach requested review from npm1 and bvandersloot-mozilla October 23, 2024 16:29

npm1 reviewed Oct 24, 2024

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Specify the mode API #660

Specify the mode API #660

tttzach commented Oct 2, 2024 •

edited by pr-preview bot

Loading

cbiesinger left a comment

TallTed left a comment

TallTed left a comment

cbiesinger left a comment

wseltzer commented Oct 15, 2024 •

edited

Loading

tttzach commented Oct 15, 2024

philsmart commented Oct 15, 2024

npm1 Oct 21, 2024

tttzach Oct 23, 2024

npm1 Oct 24, 2024

npm1 Oct 21, 2024

tttzach Oct 23, 2024

bvandersloot-mozilla left a comment

hlflanagan commented Oct 22, 2024

tttzach left a comment

tttzach Oct 23, 2024

tttzach Oct 23, 2024

npm1 Oct 24, 2024

npm1 Oct 24, 2024

npm1 Oct 24, 2024

npm1 Oct 24, 2024

npm1 Oct 24, 2024

Specify the mode API #660

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Specify the mode API #660

Conversation

tttzach commented Oct 2, 2024 • edited by pr-preview bot Loading

cbiesinger left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TallTed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TallTed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cbiesinger left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

wseltzer commented Oct 15, 2024 • edited Loading

tttzach commented Oct 15, 2024

philsmart commented Oct 15, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bvandersloot-mozilla left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hlflanagan commented Oct 22, 2024

tttzach left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tttzach commented Oct 2, 2024 •

edited by pr-preview bot

Loading

wseltzer commented Oct 15, 2024 •

edited

Loading