I have a chrome extension built for scraping a few particular pages, and then generating docs with that data on screens built into the extension. It requires regular updates. I keep getting the "Publishing will be delayed warning" below when I go to publish in the Chrome Web Store. The message suggests that I use active tab and narrower host permissions even though my manifest contains the following:
"permissions": ["storage",
"declarativeContent",
"activeTab",
"downloads"],
"background": {
"scripts": ["background.js"],
"persistent": false
},
In the background.js, I have a chrome.declarativeContent.onPageChanged.addRules statement with the following chrome.declarativeContent.PageStateMatcher conditions:
pageUrl: {hostContains: ''}
pageUrl: {hostContains: 'secure.vermont.gov'}
pageUrl: {urlContains: 'chrome-extension://'}
I replaced first one (intended for local files) with codeforbtv.org so there was no wildcard. Nonetheless, I got the same warning in the store.
The only tabs function I use is in the following code:
chrome.tabs.executeScript(null, { file: 'payload.js' });
Payload.js is two lines of code which grabs a large html block and sends it via chrome.runtime.sendMessage.
The relevant codebase can be found here in the extensionDirectory folder: https://github.com/codeforbtv/expunge-vt.
The extension can work on the sample HTML files in the sampleDocketHTML folder.
hostContains: '' matches every URL because '' is present in every string so it's a broad host permission.
To match local files you can probably use schemes: ['file'] but that will be still a broad host permission so I guess you'll have to forget about files.
urlContains: 'chrome-extension://' from the point of view of the web store's automatic detector is also a broad host permission because evidently the script doesn't analyze the pattern so it's considered just a substring match.
An extension can't work on other extension's pages anyway normally so you probably don't need this.
hostContains: 'secure.vermont.gov' is also a broad host permission because this pattern is not anchored to the TLD (top-level domain) so it may occur anywhere and thus match totally irrelevant hosts.
Either use hostSuffix: '.secure.vermont.gov' which will also match the dot-less version and any subdomain or hostEquals.
The warning is permissions based and is a general warning the review will take longer if you use more sensitive permissions for your extension.
Anecdotally I recently used wildcard host permissions (:///*) for a published extension and received the same warning. The review process ended up taking 3 days until it was approved.
You should in general expect longer review times when using sensitive permissions as Google's bandwidth to manually review extensions is currently reduced.
Related
I found chrome.declarativeNetRequest only supports static rules, What I want is to call some custom methods before actions like redirect/request. I haven't found a solution so far. I'm not sure if I can still do this under the Manifest V3.
There are two usecases for my extension.
Before the redirect, I need to execute custom method.
chrome.webRequest.onBeforeRequest.addListener(
function(requestDetails) {
//
// I can get id from requestDetails.url,
// then do some custom business logic.
//
custom_function(requestDetails.url);
return {redirectUrl:"javascript:"};
},
{urls: [ "url_pattern?id=*" ]},
["blocking"]
);
Before some request, I want add/modify requestHeaders according to the user's browser.
chrome.webRequest.onBeforeSendHeaders.addListener(
function (details) {
details.requestHeaders.push({
"name": "User-Agent",
"value": navigator.userAgent + "version_1.0.0"
});
return {requestHeaders: details.requestHeaders};
},
{
urls: ["*://url_pattern"],
types: ["xmlhttprequest"]
},
["blocking", "requestHeaders"]
);
#wOxxOm Thank you very much for your patient answer !
I prefer to spinner.html. But I have another problem.
I can't set the regexSubstitution to the extension address,
I can use the extensionPath, but the corresponding capture groups doesn't work here.
"regexFilter": "google.com*"
The following are all incorrect:
can't use the corresponding capture groups.
"extensionPath": "/spinner.html?url=\\0"
can't use the extension's address.
"regexSubstitution": "spinner.html?url=\\0"
Is my configuration incorrect?
Adding/deleting headers can only accept static values and it's shown in the official example.
Conditionally adding/deleting/modifying headers based on response headers is tracked in https://crbug.com/1141166.
Nontrivial transformations that exceed the functionality of the actions listed in the documentation naturally cannot be re-implemented.
When https://crbug.com/1262147 is fixed we will be able to define a declarativeNetRequest rule to redirect to a page inside your extension via regexSubstitution or extensionPath and append the original URL as a parameter. This page will act as an interstitial, it will display some kind of UI or a simple progress spinner, process the URL parameters, and redirect the current tab to another URL.
In many cases this approach would introduce flicker and unnecessary visual fuss while the interstitial is displayed shortly, thus frustrating users who will likely abandon using such extensions altogether. Chromium team members who work on extensions seem to think this obscene workaround is acceptable so it's likely they'll roll with it, see also https://crbug.com/1013582.
Use the observational webRequest (without 'blocking' parameter) and chrome.tabs.update to redirect the tab. The downside is that the original request will be sent to the remote server. And this approach obviously won't work for iframes, to redirect those you'll have to inject/declare a content script, to which your webRequest listener would send a message with a frameId parameter.
Keep a visible tab with an html page from your extension, and use the blocking chrome.webRequest inside its scripts. It's a terrible UX, of course, even though endorsed by the Chromium's extensions team, with many extensions using this kludge the user's browsers will have to keep a lot of such tabs open.
P.S. The blocking webRequest will be still available for force-installed extensions via policies, but it's not something most users would be willing to use.
I am creating a chrome extension that adds an action with a global hotkey to JIRA. I can hard code the url for my own instance of JIRA into my extension, but I would like this url to be user configurable as other users will have different urls for their own JIRA instances.
I would like to know if there is a better way of doing this than just giving my extension permission for all urls and checking in my background script to compare the current url to the one the user has chosen as a setting. Ideally my background/inject script would only run on the users chosen url. I looked at the permissions api but can't figure it out.
My current manifest.json looks as follows, I have hard coded permission to my jira url, is there a way to make this permission user configurable?
{
"permissions": [
"contentSettings",
"storage",
"commands",
"http://myjiraurl/*"
],
"background": {
"matches": [
"http://myjiraurl/*"
],
"scripts": ["src/background/background.js"]
},
"content_scripts": [
{
"matches": [
"http://myjiraurl/*"
],
"js": [
"js/jquery.min.js",
"src/inject/inject.js"
]
}
]
}
Whatever you do, in order to inject into arbitrary hosts, you have to have http://*/ and https://*/ in your permissions, preferably optional permissions. Your proposal - comparing the current url with the one in the settings - sounds very reasonable: Just compare the current url with the one in the setting and make a chrome.permissions.request if it matches, silently stop running your code if it fails.
I can think of one work-around to avoid that, but honestly it's not giving you much:
Use http://*/ and https://*/ as optional permissions (you should really really make them optional anyway).
Make the chrome.permissions.request call at the time the user is modifying the options.
In your background script, make a chrome.permissions.contains call for the current url and silently stop running your code if there's no permission.
The result of the above is that instead of comparing the current url to the one in the setting, it will compare the current url with whatever the extension has previously got permission for. I guess it simplifies the background script a bit (you don't have to get the url stored in the settings), but makes the options page code a bit more complicated.
Content Script can be injected programatically or permanently by declaring in Extension manifest file. Programatic injection require host permission, which is generally grant by browser or page action.
In my use case, I want to inject gmail, outlook.com and yahoo mail web site without user action. I can do by declaring all of them manifest, but by doing so require all data access to those account. Some use may want to grant only outlook.com, but not gmail. Programatic injection does not work because I need to know when to inject. Using tabs permission is also require another permission.
Is there any good way to optionally inject web site?
You cannot run code on a site without the appropriate permissions. Fortunately, you can add the host permissions to optional_permissions in the manifest file to declare them optional and still allow the extension to use them.
In response to a user gesture, you can use chrome.permission.request to request additional permissions. This API can only be used in extension pages (background page, popup page, options page, ...). As of Chrome 36.0.1957.0, the required user gesture also carries over from content scripts, so if you want to, you could add a click event listener from a content script and use chrome.runtime.sendMessage to send the request to the background page, which in turn calls chrome.permissions.request.
Optional code execution in tabs
After obtaining the host permissions (optional or mandatory), you have to somehow inject the content script (or CSS style) in the matching pages. There are a few options, in order of my preference:
Use the chrome.declarativeContent.RequestContentScript action to insert a content script in the page. Read the documentation if you want to learn how to use this API.
Use the webNavigation API (e.g. chrome.webNavigation.onCommitted) to detect when the user has navigated to the page, then use chrome.tabs.executeScript to insert the content script in the tab (or chrome.tabs.insertCSS to insert styles).
Use the tabs API (chrome.tabs.onUpdated) to detect that a page might have changed, and insert a content script in the page using chrome.tabs.executeScript.
I strongly recommend option 1, because it was specifically designed for this use case. Note: This API was added in Chrome 38, but only worked with optional permissions since Chrome 39. Despite the "WARNING: This action is still experimental and is not supported on stable builds of Chrome." in the documentation, the API is actually supported on stable. Initially the idea was to wait for a review before publishing the API on stable, but that review never came and so now this API has been working fine for almost two years.
The second and third options are similar. The difference between the two is that using the webNavigation API adds an additional permission warning ("Read your browsing history"). For this warning, you get an API that can efficiently filter the navigations, so the number of chrome.tabs.executeScript calls can be minimized.
If you don't want to put this extra permission warning in your permission dialog, then you could blindly try to inject on every tab. If your extension has the permission, then the injection will succeed. Otherwise, it fails. This doesn't sound very efficient, and it is not... ...on the bright side, this method does not require any additional permissions.
By using either of the latter two methods, your content script must be designed in such a way that it can handle multiple insertions (e.g. with a guard). Inserting in frames is also supported (allFrames:true), but only if your extension is allowed to access the tab's URL (or the frame's URL if frameId is set).
I advise against using declarativeContent APIs because they're deprecated and buggy with CSS, as described by the last comment on https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=708115.
Use the new content script registration APIs instead. Here's what you need, in two parts:
Programmatic script injection
There's a new contentScripts.register() API which can programmatically register content scripts and they'll be loaded exactly like content_scripts defined in the manifest:
browser.contentScripts.register({
matches: ['https://your-dynamic-domain.example.com/*'],
js: [{file: 'content.js'}]
});
This API is only available in Firefox but there's a Chrome polyfill you can use. If you're using Manifest v3, there's the native chrome.scripting.registerContentScript which does the same thing but slightly differently.
Acquiring new permissions
By using chrome.permissions.request you can add new domains on which you can inject content scripts. An example would be:
// In a content script or options page
document.querySelector('button').addEventListener('click', () => {
chrome.permissions.request({
origins: ['https://your-dynamic-domain.example.com/*']
}, granted => {
if (granted) {
/* Use contentScripts.register */
}
});
});
And you'll have to add optional_permissions in your manifest.json to allow new origins to be requested:
{
"optional_permissions": [
"*://*/*"
]
}
In Manifest v3 this property was renamed to optional_host_permissions.
I also wrote some tools to further simplify this for you and for the end user, such as
webext-domain-permission-toggle and webext-dynamic-content-scripts. They will automatically register your scripts in the next browser launches and allow the user the remove the new permissions and scripts.
Since the existing answer is now a few years old, optional injection is now much easier and is described here. It says that to inject a new file conditionally, you can use the following code:
// The lines I have commented are in the documentation, but the uncommented
// lines are the important part
//chrome.runtime.onMessage.addListener((message, callback) => {
// if (message == “runContentScript”){
chrome.tabs.executeScript({
file: 'contentScript.js'
});
// }
//});
You will need the Active Tab Permission to do this.
Ok, so just the other day I learned that you can inspect the devtools if it is in its own window(explained here). I also learned that you can style the devtools with your own css by editing the Custom.css file in your profile on your computer(more on that here).
What I want to do is not only add css, but also javascript, via a chrome extension. I am very aware of devtools pages, but those do not do what I want. Pretty much I want to get a content script to run on the devtools inspector itself. I found one extension that does exactly this, but for the life of me I have not been able to replicate it(even when copy-pasting the code!!). The extension is the "Discover DevTools Companion extension" from Code School(on the webstore). They even explain how it works, but I still have had no luck. That was the only extension I have found that does what I want. So I guess what I'm really asking is if its just me that cannot get it to work or if others that try are having trouble also.
Usually, you cannot create a Chrome extension which injects code in a devtools page.
The "Discover DevTools Companion" extension from now on, referred to as DDC is allowed to do this, because this extension is whitelisted in the source code of Chromium: (this is no longer the case)
// Whitelist "Discover DevTools Companion" extension from Google that
// needs the ability to script DevTools pages. Companion will assist
// online courses and will be needed while the online educational programs
// are in place.
scripting_whitelist_.push_back("angkfkebojeancgemegoedelbnjgcgme");
If you want to publish an extension in the Chrome Web Store with these capabilities, give up.
If you want to create such an extension for personal / internal use, read further.
Method 1: Impersonate the DDC a whitelisted extension
The easiest way to create an extension with such permissions is to create an extension with the extension ID of a whitelisted extension (e.g. ChromeVox). This is achieved by copying the "key" key of its manifest file to your extension's manifest (see also: How to get the key?). This is a minimal example:
manifest.json
{
// WARNING: Do NOT load this extension if you use ChromeVox!
// WARNING: Do NOT load this extension if you use ChromeVox!
// WARNING: This is a REALLY BIG HAMMER.
"content_scripts": [{
"js": [ "run_as_devtools.js" ],
"matches": [ "<all_urls>" ]
}],
// This is the key for kgejglhpjiefppelpmljglcjbhoiplfn (ChromeVox)
"key": "MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDEGBi/oD7Yl/Y16w3+gee/95/EUpRZ2U6c+8orV5ei+3CRsBsoXI/DPGBauZ3rWQ47aQnfoG00sXigFdJA2NhNK9OgmRA2evnsRRbjYm2BG1twpaLsgQPPus3PyczbDCvhFu8k24wzFyEtxLrfxAGBseBPb9QrCz7B4k2QgxD/CwIDAQAB",
"manifest_version": 2,
"name": "Elevated Devtools extension",
"version": "1.0"
}
run_as_devtools.js
if (location.protocol === 'chrome-devtools:') (function() {
'use strict';
// Whatever you want to do with the devtools.
})();
Note: This method is truly a hack. Since the extension shares the same ID as ChromeVox, both extensions cannot co-exist. And if Chrome decides to remove the whitelisted extension, then your permissions will evaporate.
Instead of filtering via the content script, you can also use the include_globs key to restrict the content script to devtools only.
Method 2: Modify resources.pak
I suggest to go with method 1 if possible. When method 1 fails (e.g. because the extension is no longer whitelisted), use the next method.
Get paktools.py, unpack.py and pack.py from DennisKehrig/patch_devtools (on Github).
Locate your Chrome directory containing resources.pak.
Run python2 unpack.py resources.pak, which creates a directory resources containing all files (all file names are numbers).
Locate the file containing a script which runs in the context of the developer tools. Add your desired code there.
Remove resources.pak
Run python2 pack.py resources to create the new resources.pak file.
Note: resources.pak may be replaced when Chrome is updated, so I suggest to create a script which automates my described algorithm. That shouldn't be too difficult.
If you're interested, you can look up the .pak file format in ui/base/resource/data_pack_literal.cc (description in human language).
For those googlers who end up at this page (as I did) looking for something else, this page answers the question of manipulating DevTools ITSELF - not adding jQuery to DevTools, or injecting javaScript onto a web page. For those, see here instead:
Inject jQuery into DevTools (Chrome or Firefox):
Firefox DevTools: Automatically injecting jQuery
Inject your own javascript/css onto any web page:
How to edit a website's background colors
I am trying to learn to use the chrome.tabs.executeScript commend. I've created a simple extension with a browser action. My background.html file currently looks like this:
<html>
<script>
chrome.browserAction.onClicked.addListener(function(tab) {
chrome.tabs.executeScript(null,{code:"document.body.bgColor='red'"});
chrome.tabs.executeScript(null, {file: "content_script.js"});
});
</script>
</html>
The "content_script.js" file contains document.body.bgColor='red'.
When pushing the browser action's button nothing happens. Obviously I'm missing something very basic.
I've checked with console.log that indeed control reaches the chrome.tabs.executeScript calls when the browser action is pressed. Otherwise I'm not sure how to even check if my content script's code is run (it seems not; console.log I put in the content script has no effect, but maybe it shouldn't have one even if the script is run successfully).
Make sure you have domain and tab permissions in the manifest:
"permissions": [
"tabs", "http://*/*", "https://*/*"
]
Then to change body color try:
chrome.tabs.executeScript(null,{code:"document.body.style.backgroundColor='red'"});
Also keep in mind that content scripts are not injected into any chrome:// or extension gallery pages.
For those of you still having issues, you need to make sure to reload the extension's permissions in Chrome.
Go to chrome://extensions , scroll to your extension, and click on "reload". Make sure that your permissions have been updated by clicking on the permissions link right next to your extension.
You actually don't need and don't want the 'tabs' permission for executeScript.
"permissions": [
"http://*/*",
"https://*/*"
]
Should be enough.
It's not recommended to use http://*/* and https://*/*. From the Google documentation:
To inject a programmatic content script, provide the activeTab permission in the manifest. This grants secure access to the active site's host and temporary access to the tabs permission, enabling the content script to run on the current active tab without specifying cross-origin permissions.
Instead, (as suggested in the page) just use activeTab permission.
Remark: more explanation for the security issue
Without activeTab, this extension would need to request full, persistent access to every web site, just so that it could do its work if it happened to be called upon by the user. This is a lot of power to entrust to such a simple extension. And if the extension is ever compromised, the attacker gets access to everything the extension had.
In contrast, an extension with the activeTab permission only obtains access to a tab in response to an explicit user gesture. If the extension is compromised the attacker would need to wait for the user to invoke the extension before obtaining access. And that access only lasts until the tab is navigated or is closed.
(emphasis mine)
In the example code posted by the OP, activeTab is sufficient.
However, if the extension is more complex and needs to work "automatically" (i.e. without the user clicking the button); then this method will not work and additional permission is required.
Most of the answers above seems to be working fine for manifest version 2 but when it comes manifest-3 their seems to be some workaround to make the content-script load in the latest manifest 3.We need to use the following steps to execute content script in manifest 3
First adding permission "scripting" in manifest
"permissions": [
"storage",
"tabs",
"activeTab",
"scripting"
]
Once the scripting perimission is provided, we can use the scripting api like below
In background.js,
chrome.tabs.query({}, (tabList) => {
if (!tabList.length) return;
tabList.forEach((tab) => {
chrome.scripting.executeScript(
{
files: ['contentScript.js'],
target: {
tabId: tab.id,
allFrames: true
}
}
);
});
});
In the above code we are executing the contentScript for all the available tabs in tab browser.