3 ms·

>The client will store a hash of the uncompressed response >client will add ...request header as well as a sec-available-dictionary: <SHA-256> loving it, anot

• pimterry 3y ago
  From the spec (https://github.com/WICG/compression-dictionary-transport#fingerprinting https://github.com/WICG/compression-dictionary-transport#fin...): > The existence of a dictionary is effectively a cookie for any requests that match it and should be treated as such: > * Storage partitioning for dictionary resource metadata should be at least as restrictive as for cookies. > * Dictionary entries (or at least the metadata) should be cleared any time cookies are cleared. Given that, I think it offers no more client tracking possibilities than any other existing web tech (cookies, local storage, etc)..
  • TonyTrapp 3y ago
    Maybe no more possibilities than regular cookies, but more stealthy for sure. Cookies are (somewhat) easily reviewable by the user through the web developer UI of most browsers; I doubt there will be any browser UI to managing compression dictionary.
• out_of_protocol 3y ago
  should be w3c dicts only and number of dicts and versions should be heavily limited. well, something like js,css,html/xml,json,common-web and new version every 5 years i think good enough for everyone