1757843 - Data Review for telemetry supporting Unified Reporting of the Urlbar

Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME

(Firefox :: Address Bar, enhancement, P1)

Description

[Rebecca BurWei]

Attachment: data review form completed

Comment 1

[Rebecca BurWei]

Mark, if you already have bugzilla tickets for this work, please link them here.

Comment 2

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

I've just created bug 1757943 as a meta, and linked this.

Comment 3

[Rebecca BurWei]

thank you!

Comment 4

[Chris H-C :chutten]

Comment on attachment 9266169 [details]
data review form completed

PRELIMINARY NOTES:

• I submit for branding approval the idea that a urlbar item provided by Firefox Suggest should be termed "a Firefox Suggestion" instead of "a Firefox Suggest".
• The Firefox Telemetry Client ID and Glean Client ID are Category 4 data, not Category 1 data (in the tools I admit we classify them as both).
• Some named individual must be responsible for non-expiring data collections. They must be identified in the answer to Q7.
  • data-review- due to there being no named individual.
• needinfo? Al for approving the inclusion of the Category 4 Legacy Telemetry Client Id in this new ping (including the Glean Client Id is covered under the central Glean integration data review from 2019). This is very similar to this review where you okayed the use in Glean built-in pings: adding the same information (Telemetry client_id) to a different ping for the same reasons (to link back to Telemetry in analysis, as necessary).
• If the metrics definitions for the instrumentation have been added to the tree already, ./mach data-review <bug-number> would generate a template Data Review Request for you without having to copy instrumentation details into this awkward (our fault) format.

Comment 5

[Rebecca BurWei]

Mark, would you be the right person to be responsible for the non-expiring data collections? I think this is typically owned by engineering.

Comment 6

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

(In reply to Rebecca BurWei from comment #5)

Mark, would you be the right person to be responsible for the non-expiring data collections? I think this is typically owned by engineering.

Last time we did this, we added a data science engineer plus the search team email (see the browser.search scalars). I'm not sure of best practice here, but I guess I could be?

Comment 7

[Rebecca BurWei]

@Mark - Great, can you add the search team's email to the data review doc linked in this bugzilla ticket?

@Klukas - Could you add a data eng email to the data review doc linked in this bugzilla ticket for this data not expiring?

@Al - Do you have feedback for us? (see Chutten's comment above)

Comment 8

[Jeff Klukas [:klukas] (UTC-4)]

It looks like for previous data reviews for topsites and suggest telemetry we've listed :nanj as owner (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1688698 for example). For consistency, I think it would make sense to list Nan as owner here too.

?ni :nanj - Does that sound okay to you?

Comment 9

[Nan Jiang [:nanj]]

?ni :nanj - Does that sound okay to you?

Yep, glad to own that.

Comment 10

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

(In reply to Rebecca BurWei from comment #7)

@Mark - Great, can you add the search team's email to the data review doc linked in this bugzilla ticket?

If you mean the attachment, then we can't edit the attachment, only new versions can be posted. The email address is shown here

Comment 11

[Drew Willcoxon :adw]

As triage owner, I'll give this a priority of P1 and assign it to Nan per comment 8 and 9. Please feel free to update the priority and/or assignee as appropriate.

Comment 12

[Nan Jiang [:nanj]]

Hi Rebecca, do you have any update on this? Is this unified reporting work for URLbar still in progress?

Comment 13

[Rebecca BurWei]

I'm not sure. Mark, are you working on this?

Comment 14

[AL]

Sorry for the delay. Just noticed this ticket. I don't see any concern from the privacy perspective

Comment 15

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

(In reply to Rebecca BurWei from comment #13)

I'm not sure. Mark, are you working on this?

We are expecting to start work on it "soon", maybe in a couple of weeks but it could be the summer depending on how things go.

Comment 16

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

It looks like we implemented these in bug 1800579, bug 1804558, bug 1800414 and co - the relevant bugs will have got the required data reviews.