I'm working on a Chrome extension that needs contentscripts inside IFrames inside the backgroundpage.
Also I don't want to use the <all_urls> permission. I want to request only the needed host-permissions at runtime.
I can't find a way to do both.
Here are the two ways to declare contentscripts.
The problem with the manifest file is: I can't specify a match-pattern, because I don't know the hosts, and I don't want to use the <all_urls> match-pattern. Is there a way to change this setting at runtime?
The problem with the programmatic injection is: The backgroundpage doesn't have a tabId. Without it I can't use chrome.tabs.executeScript. Is there another way to inject a contentscript into an IFrame inside the backgroundpage?
It's not possible yet. Here is the feature request I made. They say:
it's probably not something we can get to immediately
Related
I'm working on a Chrome extension that among other things supports a page with multiple dynamically created iframes in it, pointing to multiple different domains. I need to load a content script into each of those iframes, ideally without loading it into every page.
There's a separate content script that's running on all those iframe pages, which can detect that it's in an applicable iframe, and I'd like it to load this other content script. After some wrangling, it can get the frameId of that iframe, but chrome.tabs.executeScript() takes only tabId, not frameId, so the script loads in the top-level page, not the desired iframe.
Note that the script I want to inject needs to run as a content script, with access to the available Chrome APIs.
Is it possible to do this? How?
Update: Ach, you're of course right wOxxOm, that "frameId can be specified inside executeScript's second parameter". Thank you again, make that an answer and I'll accept it. I need to read more carefully, apparently. I'm a long-time programmer, but new to Chrome extensions, there's a lot to absorb.
Secondary question: It appears that I need to add <all_urls> or http://*/* and https://*/*, permission to the manifest for this to be allowed. The main content_script that's doing this has similar match patterns, and I could add this secondary script there too, but it's actually only needed for pages shown in these iframes, so this seems better to me. Are there other downsides to doing it this way, or is there some better approach, other than xhr/eval?
Chrome appears to allow users to call a page from the extension using a format similar to: \
chrome-extension://dckobaoiekjnnheocplcnkhnhhnpjcnl/OAuth/_callback.html
The problem is I am using Salesforce and for whatever reason they consider having a dash in the protocol invalid. The problem I am running into is I have to place a callback URL for the process I am working on. Is there another way to use https and something akin to Localhost or perhaps another protocol that does not contain a - in order to be able to call a page within my Chrome Extension?
If you are making a call from a background page then relative path OAuth/_callback.html should work.
I know there's a way for extensions and pages to communicate locally, but I need to send a message from an outside URL, have my Chrome Extension listen for it.
I have tried easyXDM in the background page, but it seems to stop listening after awhile, as if Google "turns off" the Javascript in the background page after awhile.
I think you may try some walk around and build a site with some specific data structure, and then implement a content script which will look for this specific that specific data structure, and when i finds one it can fetch the data you want to be passed to your extension.
Yes, you need a content script that communicates with the page using DOM Events.. Instructions on how to do that are here:
http://code.google.com/chrome/extensions/content_scripts.html#host-page-communication
I'm wondering, is it even possible to treat the request for the Xul Browser component to open a new window? I tried changing the window.open function, but looks like it's never called.
All links that open in a new window are not opening in my application.
I found this page on the subject, but the provided solution is showing no different behavior.
Any hint on this?
(by the way, I'm developing a stand alone application, not a Firefox's extension)
I'm assuming you are in a XULRunner application, and that you are trying to load a chrome URL from a non-chrome source in a browser (e.g. HTTP or local file). While enabling UniversalXPConnect and UniversalBrowserWrite can be helpful, they are also a security risk (since any arbitrary script on the web could use them), so they tend to be disabled in browsers (for example, running that line in Firebug will give you an exception):
>>> netscape.security.PrivilegeManager.enablePrivilege("UniversalXPConnect UniversalBrowserWrite");
Error: A script from "http://stackoverflow.com" was denied UniversalXPConnect UniversalBrowserWrite privileges.
How about you try using codebase security principals and see if that makes a difference? (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/components/signed-scripts.html#codebase). For me in Firebug it does allow me to get the additional permissions after I OK it with a big, nasty looking dialog), but still doesn't allow me to open a Chrome URL with window.open. The next step is probably to try changing your conf file to use contentaccessible so that the relevant parts of your content are accessible (see https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Chrome_Registration#contentaccessible).
To avoid the nasty message when elevating permissions, you could try setting permissions for the right files automatically as described at http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=1769555.
Also, make sure you check the browser type (https://developer.mozilla.org/en/XUL/Attribute/browser.type). If the browser type is not chrome, then it might be worth trying making it chrome and seeing if that makes a difference.
If any of my assumptions are wrong get back to me and I will try something else.
does normal js not work?
window.open(url,windowname,flags);
There are two ways that I know of.
The first is to set the browser.chromeURL preference to a chrome URL that contains a <browser type="content-primary">. The page that the content window tried to open will load into the given browser.
The second is to set the property window.browserDOMWindow with an object that you define to implement the nsIBrowserDOMWindow interface. This allows you to divert the open call into a tab, if you are using a tabbed interface. Note: the tabbed browsing preferences must be set to allow windows to be diverted into tabs, otherwise XULrunner will fall back on browser.chromeURL.
I am running into a problem. I want to host an external page securely. Meaning, no JavaScript in the iFrame. Or it only execute safe code, such as change the text of its page or set the color of its page. And I want to keep CSS alive.
They should look the same from the source, but, no melacious code running behind. No ActiveX, no Flash, no Plug-in. I want them look correct without all the security compromise.
I have tried jQuery load(), but, it only works for internal pages, not external pages. And the CSS in that DIV overwrite my site's CSS, which is not what I wanted.
I am looking for an isolated frame like iframe. But, without security problem. Is this possible?
HTML5 now has a 'sandbox' option for iframes.
This will allow you to block code inside the iframe.
You can learn more at:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/iframe
You can create a server side stateful proxy, like a php script that read the remote page and clean whatever you don't like. Not a really simple thing to do, but I'm afraid there is no really easy way around.
I mean, for instance, you create proxy.php:
<?php
$remote = file($_GET['remote']);
// .. filter whatever you like in $remote then print it
And then link to a site using
<iframe src="proxy.php?remote=http://www.example.com"></iframe>
This is not a complete example, just a way of showing my idea.