w3c/gpc

Issues

• Clarify that GPC signal does not legitimize cross-site tracking as default web condition

  #82 opened 3 months ago by j-br0
  2

• Move laws to Explainer

  #73 opened 10 months ago by SebastianZimmeck
  3

• Say that the do-not-sell-or-share preference applies unless the site has an overriding signal

  #80 opened 3 months ago by jyasskin
  2

• Add a security considerations section

  #84 opened 2 months ago by plehegar
  1

• Clarify "targeted advertising" versus "cross-site targeted advertising"?

  #83 opened 2 months ago by michaelkleber
  2

• Weak requirements language

  #35 opened 2 years ago by martinthomson
  3

• Use HTTP structured field values

  #6 opened 2 months ago by darobin
  23

• Notion

  #79 opened 6 months ago by Yunglow22
  0

• Evaluation

  #78 opened 7 months ago by Yunglow22
  0

• F

  #77 opened 7 months ago by Saud9911
  0

• I'll merge this. If any devs think we should change the glob pattern instead we can change the behavior in a secondary PR.

  #76 opened 7 months ago by Yunglow22
  1

• Make the architecture support other privacy laws

  #51 opened a year ago by jyasskin
  10

• Respec

  #75 opened 8 months ago by Yunglow22
  0

• §5 should end after the sentence "For additional details on legal effects, consult the explainer."

  #74 opened 9 months ago by hober
  2

• Mixed documentation on navigator.globalPrivacyControl returning 1 or true

  #64 opened 9 months ago by ryan-a-guthrie
  5

• Create consumer-facing GPC instructions

  #63 opened a year ago by SebastianZimmeck
  1

• Add direct identification for each jurisdiction

  #69 opened 10 months ago by SebastianZimmeck
  1

• GPC spec status

  #72 opened 10 months ago by HeinzBaumann
  4

• Give UAs more help in establishing user intent

  #52 opened a year ago by jyasskin
  7

• Clarify when a Global Privacy Control preference needs to be conveyed

  #66 opened 10 months ago by SebastianZimmeck
  0

• Legal Effects section may fall out of date

  #53 opened a year ago by bvandersloot-mozilla
  5

• Are implementers expected to always have the header active or not?

  #60 opened a year ago by AramZS
  3

• Should the navigator property always have the property active or not?

  #62 opened a year ago by AramZS
  5

• Set up explainer document in this repo with more detail for implementers

  #56 opened a year ago by AramZS
  6

• Private mode/incognito

  #34 opened 2 years ago by martinthomson
  8

• Fingerprinting

  #36 opened a year ago by martinthomson
  4

• Ensure consistency between HTTP and JavaScript

  #49 opened a year ago by arichiv
  6

• Does this really need a GPC support resource

  #33 opened a year ago by martinthomson
  13

• Dates in the support resource

  #32 opened 2 years ago by martinthomson
  0

• Update gpc-spec links

  #44 opened 2 years ago by SebastianZimmeck
  0

• lack of version

  #40 opened 2 years ago by patmmccann
  4

• Setting and reading headers

  #28 opened 2 years ago by martymcflyDMC
  2

• Latest published version link returns 404

  #31 opened 2 years ago by coolharsh55
  1

• Standardized server-side response when GPC compliance cannot be guaranteed

  #29 opened 3 years ago by KoopaKing
  2

• Use clearer header field name or value

  #27 opened 3 years ago by brodrigu
  3

• Use RFC3339 for lastUpdate field of support resource

  #21 opened 3 years ago by braedon
  3

• Privacy Violation Alteadyn

  #26 opened 3 years ago by marksjc
  0

• Follow up question...

  #25 opened 3 years ago by HeinzBaumann
  1

• Consider to expose globalPrivacyControl also in workers

  #24 opened 3 years ago by smaug----
  4

• Please consider bringing this spec to Web Privacy CG

  #23 opened 3 years ago by othermaciej
  2

• Possibility of specifying other values for GPC signal

  #22 opened 3 years ago by coolharsh55
  8

• Simplify navigator.globalPrivacyControl wording

  #11 opened 4 years ago by scottlow
  12

• When can a browser context read a valid navigator.globalPrivacyControl?

  #12 opened 4 years ago by michael-oneill
  4

• Reference to ePrivacy needed

  #13 opened 4 years ago by michael-oneill
  1

• GPC Support Representation - versioning

  #20 opened 4 years ago by mnot
  4

• "data" is poorly defined

  #19 opened 4 years ago by robrwo
  3

• How does this relate to the DNT header?

  #18 opened 4 years ago by robrwo
  1

• Reference needed for DNT TPE

  #14 opened 4 years ago by michael-oneill
  1

• Remove references to ordered maps in .well-known returned values

  #7 opened 4 years ago by pes10k
  0

• Host the GPC Support Resource at /.well-known/gpc.json

  #9 opened 4 years ago by dmarti
  2