You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Forking this from #1321 where we are planning to propagate the origin field on requests when a service worker does evt.respondWith(fetch(evt.request)). In order for the correct SameSite cookies to be sent in some cases we also need to propagate the "site for cookies" from the original request.
For example, consider if A frames B1 and then B1 does window.open(B2). Without a service worker in play "site for cookies" would be empty because B1 has a cross-site ancestor. With a service worker, however, the service worker will have a "site for cookies" set to B (even if partitioning is implemented since B2 is not planned to be partitioned).
Note, when "site for cookies" is propagated, we may want to allow it when the propagation results in the same or a more restrictive "site for cookies". I'm not sure if there is a way for the service worker "site for cookies", but we probably don't want the initiator to relax that.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Says the site-for-cookies for a navigation is determined by the frame being targeted by the navigation. In the scenario above we are creating a top-level document, so the site-for-cookies will always be set. The initiator's site-for-cookies is not relevant here.
That is solved by partitioning with the "ancestor chain bit". We can set site-for-cookies properly for the service worker context based on the information in the StorageKey. That is better than trying to plumb something through because it applies to all fetches and not just passthrough fetches.
Forking this from #1321 where we are planning to propagate the origin field on requests when a service worker does
evt.respondWith(fetch(evt.request))
. In order for the correct SameSite cookies to be sent in some cases we also need to propagate the "site for cookies" from the original request.For example, consider if A frames B1 and then B1 does window.open(B2). Without a service worker in play "site for cookies" would be empty because B1 has a cross-site ancestor. With a service worker, however, the service worker will have a "site for cookies" set to B (even if partitioning is implemented since B2 is not planned to be partitioned).
Note, when "site for cookies" is propagated, we may want to allow it when the propagation results in the same or a more restrictive "site for cookies". I'm not sure if there is a way for the service worker "site for cookies", but we probably don't want the initiator to relax that.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: