4 ms·
Nope, no longer. Some large advertising companies like Taboola have abused caches to store unique identifiers. I won't be shocked if Google and Facebook have al
by zinekeller 4y ago
Nope, no longer. Some large advertising companies like Taboola have abused caches to store unique identifiers. I won't be shocked if Google and Facebook have also used this, so Safari (from 2013, https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110269 https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110269), Firefox (depending on settings from 2018 and widely deployed in 2020, https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Privacy/State_Partitioning https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Privacy/State_P...) and Chrome (from 2020, https://developer.chrome.com/blog/http-cache-partitioning/ https://developer.chrome.com/blog/http-cache-partitioning/) now separate caches.
- nybble41 4y agoWith SRI you can't store unique identifiers in the cache since the cached content has to match the hash in the URI. The only real privacy leak would be potentially determining whether certain data was already cached.
- zinekeller 4y agoWhile you're correct, it's too little too late. You should assume that everyone effectively don't have a web cache. It's like the effect of Spectre and Meltdown: JS timers are no longer accurate to compensate for them.