proposal to improve registration #10
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
eshellman
commented
Mar 27, 2017
| @@ -368,7 +368,9 @@ When a client opens a License Document for the first time and gets access to its | |||
|
|
|||
| * It <b>MUST</b> attempt to register itself again if it couldn't do so the first time that the License Document was opened | |||
|
|
|||
| During the registration, the client <b>MUST</b> always send the same unique identifier for a specific device, no matter which Status Document it interacts with. Any further interaction <b>SHOULD</b> use the same identifier/name. | |||
| During the registration, the client <b>MUST</b> always try to send the same unique identifier for a specific device, no matter which Status Document it interacts with. Any further interaction with a provider <b>SHOULD</b> use the same identifier/name. The client <b>SHOULD</b> consider user privacy when generating a unique identifier, for example by generating a random string during software installation. To prevent user tracking across providers, the client <b>MAY</b> generate device unique ids for each provider. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since it's not always possible to ALWAYS send the same identifier for a device, this makes clear that the implementation should do what it can. It also makes clear that an implementation is not out of spec if it uses a different device ID for each provider. If LCP ecosystems are successful and have many participating providers, this is a measure that would prevent providers from sharing registration data for purposes of user tracking.
|
Sounds reasonable to me. |
eshellman
commented
Mar 27, 2017
| During the registration, the client <b>MUST</b> always send the same unique identifier for a specific device, no matter which Status Document it interacts with. Any further interaction <b>SHOULD</b> use the same identifier/name. | ||
| During the registration, the client <b>MUST</b> always try to send the same unique identifier for a specific device, no matter which Status Document it interacts with. Any further interaction with a provider <b>SHOULD</b> use the same identifier/name. The client <b>SHOULD</b> consider user privacy when generating a unique identifier, for example by generating a random string during software installation. To prevent user tracking across providers, the client <b>MAY</b> generate device unique ids for each provider. | ||
|
|
||
| If a provider uses registration to monitor license abuse, the provider <b>SHOULD</b> take care to prevent forged registrations. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's up to the provider implementation of course.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This proposal addresses issues #5 and #6