From 185f6025d36a6326a047b8cdc08f659d85791214 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Johann Hofmann <johannhof@chromium.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 23:57:04 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Create fedcm-saa-privacy-questionnaire.md

---
 explainers/fedcm-saa-privacy-questionnaire.md | 100 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 100 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 explainers/fedcm-saa-privacy-questionnaire.md

diff --git a/explainers/fedcm-saa-privacy-questionnaire.md b/explainers/fedcm-saa-privacy-questionnaire.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..78d3bb2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/explainers/fedcm-saa-privacy-questionnaire.md
@@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
+# Security / Privacy Questionnaire for FedCM as a trust signal for the Storage Access API
+
+> 01.  What information does this feature expose,
+>      and for what purposes?
+
+This feature exposes no additional information to websites. It allows successful grants of SAA calls when a prior FedCM permission has been allowed by the user. Both APIs allow for cross-site identification, but are gated on user permission.
+
+> 2.  Do features in your specification expose the minimum amount of information
+>      necessary to implement the intended functionality?
+
+Yes, no additional information is exposed.
+
+> 5.  Do the features in your specification expose personal information,
+>      personally-identifiable information (PII), or information derived from
+>      either?
+
+Not in itself, though again this feature integrates two existing APIs that are frequently used to transmit such information across sites (gated on user permission).
+
+> 7.  How do the features in your specification deal with sensitive information?
+
+It doesn't in itself.
+
+> 8.  Does data exposed by your specification carry related but distinct
+>      information that may not be obvious to users?
+
+No
+
+> 10.  Do the features in your specification introduce state
+>      that persists across browsing sessions?
+
+No, it uses existing permission state from FedCM grants.
+
+> 12.  Do the features in your specification expose information about the
+>      underlying platform to origins?
+
+No
+
+> 14.  Does this specification allow an origin to send data to the underlying
+>      platform?
+
+No
+
+> 16.  Do features in this specification enable access to device sensors?
+
+No
+
+> 17.  Do features in this specification enable new script execution/loading
+>      mechanisms?
+
+No
+
+> 18.  Do features in this specification allow an origin to access other devices?
+
+No
+
+> 19.  Do features in this specification allow an origin some measure of control over
+>      a user agent's native UI?
+
+No
+
+> 20.  What temporary identifiers do the features in this specification create or
+>      expose to the web?
+
+None it itself.
+
+> 21.  How does this specification distinguish between behavior in first-party and
+>      third-party contexts?
+
+It follows the existing behavior of SAA and FedCM in 1P / 3P contexts
+
+> 22.  How do the features in this specification work in the context of a browser’s
+>      Private Browsing or Incognito mode?
+
+See https://github.com/privacycg/storage-access/blob/main/tag-security-questionnaire.md for how SAA handles private / incognito mode.
+
+> 24.  Does this specification have both "Security Considerations" and "Privacy
+>      Considerations" sections?
+
+Yes
+
+> 26.  Do features in your specification enable origins to downgrade default
+>      security protections?
+
+Not beyond how SAA already allows for downgrading the security protections afforded by third-party cookie blocking.
+
+> 28.  What happens when a document that uses your feature is kept alive in BFCache
+>      (instead of getting destroyed) after navigation, and potentially gets reused
+>      on future navigations back to the document?
+
+This feature uses long-lived FedCM grants and as such is intended to be usable in future documents or future navigations to the same document.
+ 
+> 30.  What happens when a document that uses your feature gets disconnected?
+
+This feature simply adds an additional trust parameter for allowing SAA grants, so this shouldn't be a consideration.
+
+> 32.  Does your feature allow sites to learn about the users use of assistive technology?
+
+No
+
+> 34.  What should this questionnaire have asked?