Skip to content

Comments

Revise privacy considerations#890

Merged
anssiko merged 2 commits intomainfrom
privacy-considerations-revised
Nov 27, 2025
Merged

Revise privacy considerations#890
anssiko merged 2 commits intomainfrom
privacy-considerations-revised

Conversation

@anssiko
Copy link
Member

@anssiko anssiko commented Sep 24, 2025

  • Add a new introduction
  • Add Fingerprinting subsection, revise and expand content
  • Add Execution Time Analysis subsection
  • Fix autolink

Fix #886


Preview | Diff

* Add a new introduction
* Add Fingerprinting subsection, revise and expand content
* Add Execution Time Analysis subsection
* Fix autolink

Fix #886
@anssiko
Copy link
Member Author

anssiko commented Oct 28, 2025

Gentle ping @sandandsnow. We’d like to receive your review for the general direction of this PR by our TPAC meeting webmachinelearning/meetings#35

An alternative to this proposal is a minimal change as outlined in #886 (comment)

The group is eager to hear the Privacy WG preference. If you’re indifferent wrt this I’d be inclined to propose the minimal change instead. Thank you for your advice.

@sandandsnow
Copy link

@anssiko, thank you for the reminder. I had missed the ask to review the PR.

@anssiko
Copy link
Member Author

anssiko commented Oct 31, 2025

I have this on our TPAC agenda now but if we're able to resolve this sooner the better and we can free time for other privacy topics.

Copy link
Member

@reillyeon reillyeon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good, just some grammar nits.

Co-authored-by: Reilly Grant <[email protected]>
@anssiko
Copy link
Member Author

anssiko commented Nov 3, 2025

Thanks for your review and suggestions, @reillyeon.

@sandandsnow, if you feel further discussion is required, we have allocated a slot for privacy topics at TPAC webmachinelearning/meetings#35 within the 10 November 2025 15:30-16:45 JST timebox for a higher bandwidth discussion.

@anssiko
Copy link
Member Author

anssiko commented Nov 27, 2025

We had a great discussion on privacy considerations in Kobe (minutes). While we did not do a line-by-line review of this particular PR there, I feel comfortable merging this PR now given the directional guidance.

@anssiko anssiko merged commit a1e0adf into main Nov 27, 2025
2 checks passed
github-actions bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 27, 2025
SHA: a1e0adf
Reason: push, by anssiko

Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
@anssiko
Copy link
Member Author

anssiko commented Nov 27, 2025

(@deniak, the auto-publish job failure looks like it could be related to the recent specberus 12.0.0 release? I'm not familiar with that codebase, so just a guesstimate.)

@anssiko anssiko deleted the privacy-considerations-revised branch November 27, 2025 15:11
@deniak
Copy link

deniak commented Nov 27, 2025

@anssiko
Copy link
Member Author

anssiko commented Nov 27, 2025

@deniak thanks for pointing me to the right direction. I opened an issue for bikeshed: speced/bikeshed#3204

@anssiko
Copy link
Member Author

anssiko commented Nov 27, 2025

That was fast. The fix landed in bikeshed 5.4.2. When auto-publish updates to the latest bikeshed the build is good again.

github-actions bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 3, 2025
SHA: a1e0adf
Reason: push, by anssiko

Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
@anssiko
Copy link
Member Author

anssiko commented Dec 3, 2025

FTR, the latest bikeshed with the fix was propagated to auto-publish. I triggered a new build and it passed. The normal publication workflow is operational again. ✅

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Revise privacy considerations

4 participants