How do I create dynamic parameters for Chrome extensions? - google-chrome-extension

I'm bundling a Chrome extension along with a software.
During the installation I'm creating a User ID and writing it in the registry.
I want my extension to "know" this value too, Can I do it without NPAPI plugin?

If you have a web-site for your product, you can do the following. During installation submit new UserID to your site (in addition to writing it into the Registry), then open in Chrome a specific page on your site, which should contain the same UserID in parameters. Your extansion can read outgoing requests, so it can parse out the UserID. Next it should check response from your server, which must compare UserID value obtained from the browser and the one obtained earlier from your installation. This will prevent UserID spoofing.
Also, though I'm not sure you'll not consider next suggestion as an overkill (so NPAPI plugin looks like acceptable solution as well), but here is how I made a binding between a Chrome extension and external program (for some much more sophisticated purposes than just reading the Registry).
You can build a minimal local web-server (or websockets server) processing requests on a dedicated port, provide it with registration information (UserID, etc), and then request required data from the extension just by means of ordinary http-request (for example, AJAX, or websockets client).
The methods have a drawback related to the need to setup user's firewall, so it would allow traffic either from your installer, or from local web-server.

Related

How to obtain the browser's download location using Node JS?

I need to transfer files from one location to another, and the destination folder should be the user's download location.
I was wondering if it's possible to obtain the browser's download location using Node JS or simply Javascript. I need a way to do it that works for all systems and browsers possibly.
Up to now I was just typing the location manually, but I need an automatised way of doing it of course!
At least on Windows, this will normally be %USERPROFILE%/Downloads.
In NodeJS, you could write:
var downloadFolder = process.env.USERPROFILE + "/Downloads";
It is not possible in node.js to know the user's download location unless you ask the user to specifically type it into some input field in a form. That location is purely a user agent setting that is purposely not disclosed to any server or web page for security reasons.
Furthermore, the server or webpage cannot influence where a file might be saved by the browser on the user's local hard drive anyway (again for security reasons) so there's nothing useful a server can do with that information anyway unless you happen to be running a server that is on the same machine as the browser. If you're working in that type of controlled environment, then perhaps you could use a browser extension that does have access to some of these kinds of things.

Securing Chrome Native Message host

I'm developing an application using Chrome Native Messaging that starts through a Chrome Extension.
My question is: How can I ensure that host application is really the same supplied by me?
I need to ensure the authenticity the application called by extension. How do I get it if I don´t have permission to read registry or check if something was changed?
That is an excellent question, and my guess is the answer is "unfortunately, you can't".
It would be interesting to implement some sort of cryptographic hash like the ones Chrome uses to verify extension files, but that's not a very strong guarantee.
Consider (all of this hypothetical):
You can secure the registry entry / manifest pretty easily this way, but what about the file itself?
Suppose you pin a hash of the executable, then it becomes painful to update it (you'll have to update the extension too in sync). Can be resolved with some kind of public key signature though instead of a hash.
Suppose you pin the executable in the manifest. What about its data files? More importantly, what about the libraries a native app uses?
Securing a Chrome extension/app is easy, since the only "library"/runtime you rely on is Chrome itself (and you put trust into that). A native app can depend on many, many things on the system (like the already mentioned libraries), how do you keep track?
Anyway, this seems like an interesting thing to brainstorm. Take a look the Chrome bug tracker if there is already anything similar, if not - try to raise a feature request. Maybe try some Chromium-related mailing list to ask the devs.
I realize this is an older post, but I thought it would be worth sharing the Chromium team's official response from the bug I filed: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=514936
An attacker who can modify registry or the FS on the user's machine can also modify the chrome binary, and so any type of validation implemented in chrome can be disabled by such attacker by mangling with the chrome's code. For that reason chrome has to trust FS (and anything that comes from local machine).
If i understood the question correctly,The solution could be
Register your executable with your server while installing along with signing the executable and store your register number inside the executable and server
In Each Request (postMessage) from extension ,send a token in addition which was given by your server
Ask the server for the Next token to send response to the extension by passing the token from extension along with you registry number
Server will respond with the token if you are a registered user
Encrypt it with your registry number and send it to extension along with the token from extension
extension holder browser will ask the server its a good response
With the help of extension token the server will identify the executable registry number and decrypt the executable token and verify which was generated by us(server) for the extension token
Once server confirmed ,Browser will consider it as a response
To be important your registry number should be secure and the client machine cannot able to get it out from the executable(Using proper signing it can be achievable)
As chrome stopped support for Applet ,I implemented the same for smart card reader in chrome
The only loop hole is,The client machine can able to trace each and every request its sending with the help of some tools
If you are able to make your executable communication with your server be secure using some httpOnly Cookie(Client machine cannot able to read) or else the password mechanism ,Most probably a secure solution you can achieve

How to restrict Chrome Apps to only work on specific computers?

I'm developing a POS Client using Chrome (packaged) Apps. It will run locally on the installed computers and interact with the server via web service. This app should only run on specific computers at the stores.
I know I can go to each store and install the .crx file in which case I don't have to publish the app to Chrome Web Store. However, I want it to be published to Chrome Web Store so that I can take advantage of its auto-updating feature.
What should I do to make sure that the app can only run at the stores' computers? (I can go the the stores and setup anything needed at the first installation).
Options I have thought of:
Create some secret key and enter it to the app at the first time of running.
Build a small tool (winforms application) to generate time-based tokens and install it on the computers. The staff will need to enter the token each time opening the app.
Any better idea how to accomplish this?
You said the app needs to talk to a web service to work. That's the key to a simple approach. (Assume you don't care whether the staff acquires a nonfunctional copy of the client app.)
At startup, app checks for existence of a validation of some kind stored in chrome.storage.local. If it exists, startup continues.
If the validation is missing, the app checks for existence of a GUID stored in chrome.storage.local.
If the GUID is missing, generate and store one using something like window.crypto.getRandomValues().
Ask the server for a validation by sending the GUID and getting a response.
If a validation comes back, save it in chrome.storage.local and go back to the start of this sequence.
Otherwise tell the user to get lost.
A full-strength version of this approach would have some additional features:
Use an HMAC(GUID, secret) for the validation. I'm assuming the staff aren't tech superstars, so something simple like a boolean would probably suffice.
Optionally add a per-launch step that sends up the GUID and validation and confirms it's still valid each time.
When the validation is requested, you might prompt for the secret key you mentioned in your question. In normal cases this would be needed only at provisioning time.
In case you haven't figured it out yet, the server is now acting like a simple licensing server, so it's up to you to decide how to decide whether the validation request succeeds. Maybe it allows only N validations to exist at once, or after you're done provisioning you hardcode future validations to fail. Maybe it limits validation requests to certain IP addresses. You get to choose.
That's the gist. It's a simple DRM system that is easier to manage than the enter-secret-at-installation method, but that won't withstand an attack of more than 30 minutes (since a smart attacker will just inject another machine's GUID and HMAC validation into the duplicate machine's chrome.storage.local).

Safe implementation of script tag hack to do XSS?

Like a lot of developers, I want to make JavaScript served up by Server "A" talk to a web service on Server "B" but am stymied by the current incarnation of same origin policy. The most secure means of overcoming this (that I can find) is a server script that sits on Server "A" and acts as a proxy between it and "B". But if I want to deploy this JavaScript in a variety of customer environments (RoR, PHP, Python, .NET, etc. etc.) and can't write proxy scripts for all of them, what do I do?
Use JSONP, some people say. Well, Doug Crockford pointed out on his website and in interviews that the script tag hack (used by JSONP) is an unsafe way to get around the same origin policy. There's no way for the script being served by "A" to verify that "B" is who they say they are and that the data it returns isn't malicious or will capture sensitive user data on that page (e.g. credit card numbers) and transmit it to dastardly people. That seems like a reasonable concern, but what if I just use the script tag hack by itself and communicate strictly in JSON? Is that safe? If not, why not? Would it be any more safe with HTTPS? Example scenarios would be appreciated.
Addendum: Support for IE6 is required. Third-party browser extensions are not an option. Let's stick with addressing the merits and risks of the script tag hack, please.
Currently browser venders are split on how cross domain javascript should work. A secure and easy to use optoin is Flash's Crossdomain.xml file. Most languages have a Cross Domain Proxies written for them, and they are open source.
A more nefarious solution would be to use xss how the Sammy Worm used to spread. XSS can be used to "read" a remote domain using xmlhttprequest. XSS isn't required if the other domains have added a <script src="https://YOUR_DOMAIN"></script>. A script tag like this allows you to evaluate your own JavaScript in the context of another domain, which is identical to XSS.
It is also important to note that even with the restrictions on the same origin policy you can get the browser to transmit requests to any domain, you just can't read the response. This is the basis of CSRF. You could write invisible image tags to the page dynamically to get the browser to fire off an unlimited number of GET requests. This use of image tags is how an attacker obtains documnet.cookie using XSS on another domain. CSRF POST exploits work by building a form and then calling .submit() on the form object.
To understand the Same Orgin Policy, CSRF and XSS better you must read the Google Browser Security Handbook.
Take a look at easyXDM, it's a clean javascript library that allows you to communicate across the domain boundary without any server side interaction. It even supports RPC out of the box.
It supports all 'modern' browser, as well as IE6 with transit times < 15ms.
A common usecase is to use it to expose an ajax endpoint, allowing you to do cross-domain ajax with little effort (check out the small sample on the front page).
What if I just use the script tag hack by itself and communicate strictly in JSON? Is that safe? If not, why not?
Lets say you have two servers - frontend.com and backend.com. frontend.com includes a <script> tag like this - <script src="http://backend.com/code.js"></script>.
when the browser evaluates code.js is considered a part of frontend.com and NOT a part of backend.com. So, if code.js contained XHR code to communicate with backend.com, it would fail.
Would it be any more safe with HTTPS? Example scenarios would be appreciated.
If you just converted your <script src="https://backend.com/code.js> to https, it would NOT be any secure. If the rest of your page is http, then an attacker could easily man-in-the-middle the page and change that https to http - or worse, include his own javascript file.
If you convert the entire page and all its components to https, it would be more secure. But if you are paranoid enough to do that, you should also be paranoid NOT to depend on an external server for you data. If an attacker compromises backend.com, he has effectively got enough leverage on frontend.com, frontend2.com and all of your websites.
In short, https is helpful, but it won't help you one bit if your backend server gets compromised.
So, what are my options?
Add a proxy server on each of your client applications. You don't need to write any code, your webserver can automatically do that for you. If you are using Apache, look up mod_rewrite
If your users are using the latest browsers, you could consider using Cross Origin Resource Sharing.
As The Rook pointed out, you could also use Flash + Crossdomain. Or you could use Silverlight and its equivalent of Crossdomain. Both technologies allow you to communicate with javascript - so you just need to write a utility function and then normal js code would work. I believe YUI already provides a flash wrapper for this - check YUI3 IO
What do you recommend?
My recommendation is to create a proxy server, and use https throughout your website.
Apologies to all who attempted to answer my question. It proceeded under a false assumption about how the script tag hack works. The assumption was that one could simply append a script tag to the DOM and that the contents of that appended script tag would not be restricted by the same origin policy.
If I'd bothered to test my assumption before posting the question, I would've known that it's the source attribute of the appended tag that's unrestricted. JSONP takes this a step further by establishing a protocol that wraps traditional JSON web service responses in a callback function.
Regardless of how the script tag hack is used, however, there is no way to screen the response for malicious code since browsers execute whatever JavaScript is returned. And neither IE, Firefox nor Webkit browsers check SSL certificates in this scenario. Doug Crockford is, so far as I can tell, correct. There is no safe way to do cross domain scripting as of JavaScript 1.8.5.

What identifying information can a website capture?

If the owner of a web site wants to track who their users are as much as possible, what things can they capture (and how). You might want to know about this in order to capture information on a site you create or, as a user, to prevent a site from capturing data on you.
Here is a starting list, but I'm sure I have missed some important ones:
Referrer (what web page had the link you followed to get here). This is a HTTP header.
IP Address of the machine you are browsing from. This is available with the HTTP headers.
User Agent (what browser you are using). This is a HTTP header.
Cookie placed on a previous visit. This is a header, available only if a cookie was placed earlier and was not deleted by the user.
Flash Cookie placed on a previous visit. Some users turn off cookies, but very few know how to turn off Flash cookies. Works like a normal cookie although it depends on Flash.
Web Bugs. Place something small (like a transparent single-pixel GIF) on the page that's served up from a 3rd party. Some third parties (such as DoubleClick) will have their own cookies and can correlate with other visits the user makes (for a fee!).
Those are the common ones I think of, but there have to be LOTS of unusual ones. For instance, this:
Time on the user's clock. Use JavaScript to transmit it.
... which I had never heard of before reading it here.
ADDED LATER (after reading this):
Please try to put just ONE item per answer, then we can use voting up to sort out the better/more-interesting ones. The list below is probably less effective.
Ah well... NEXT time I ask a question like this I'll set it up better.
And here are some of the best answers I got:
James points out that IE transmits the .NET framework version.
AviewAnew points out that one can find what sites you have visited.
Mecki points out that Screen Resolution can be determined.
Mecki also points out that any auto-fill information your browser has cached can be determined, by creating a hidden field, then reading it with JavaScript.
jjrv points out that Flash can list the fonts on the user's machine.
Kent points out that you can find out what websites a person has visited.
Silver Dragon points out you can determine the location of the mouse within the browsing window using Flash and AJAX.
Jim points out that you can tell what language the user has configured in their browser from a HTTP header.
Jim also mentions that you can detect whether people are using Greasemonkey or something similar to modify the page.
Modifications to your original:
can be escaped ( i think its an option in some browsers )
only avoidable with a proxy ( javascript can contravene this however with smart lookaround )
is unreliable, easily forged.
And assuming it was not wiped by browser closure ( session cookie ) and cookie is in the same domain/path
The real nasty ones are
Using javascript to probe your network/lan
Using javascript to access your firewall from behind the firewall and adjust its settings ( no joke )
Using the feature of the "visited link" to determine which of a list of urls have been visited. ( deep history probing ! )
Goodness knows what if the user has Windows/IE/ActiveX
There's a header that can include information about a proxy server the user is using, and that can also include the user's IP address (in which case the other IP is the one of the proxy)
Screen Resolution, Operating System, Color Depth, size of your taskbar (compare max and current resolution), if Java is enabled, Anti-Aliasing Fonts, Plugins Installed all via Javascript
A Java applet can give you a bunch of information as well, but I don't know what.
Sites you've visited
Details of your local network such as active hosts, web servers. Paper Also outlines drive-by printing, drive-by router modification
And this is all assuming the attacker doesn't pull off arbitrary code execution
Javascript can get more information than just time. E.g. screen resolution (+ color depth) being one of them.
See Getting Screen Resolution with JS
Everything JS can capture, can be transmitted using AJAX without the user performing any interaction. Other examples are (not all will work in every browser):
It can look into your browser history, e.g. what URL your browser would go if you hit back or forward.
The language of your browser (Note: usually the HTTP request will also contain a list of preferred languages for the page you request. However this list is user editable in the prefs of many browser, while JS can actually find out what the language translation your browser is using in the interface)
If your browser auto fills form fields (e.g. e-mail, username, etc.), JS can actually already read what your browser entered into the fields before you submitted the form (thus it can even read what your browser pre-filled there, even if you never submit the form at all).
A Java applet could also gather some information and transmit it, though there is not much information you wouldn't already get elsewhere. Since it's easy to get the IP of a visitor, it's possible to find out which online service he's using (looking up the IP at address services like IANA for USA or RIPE for Europe and so on) and there are services that translate IPs to country, so it's possible to find out where the user most likely is currently located.
Some additional info, that might be of interest:
Using the ip address, one can resolve the hostname, net provider / organization the IP belongs to, and rough geographic location.
Using the referer, the list of queries a specified client makes, and a reliable cookie mechanism, one can resolve the path the visitor makes (even clickthroughs to other sides, with AJAX and/or a forwarder page)
Using flash, with a combination of AJAX, the mouse location within the browsing window can be captured
The User Agent might contain information regarding operation system, installed .NET frameworks, and other curiosities
.NET framework versions are transmitted in IE, in the User Agent.
Flash can give you a list of fonts on the user's machine among other things. Javascript can send information when the mouse stops over an ad without clicking it. You can also get the window size, whether the site is open in a frame, if popups or specific plugins have been blocked, looking for Javascript features can tell if the user agent header is correct or faked...
If you're concerned about your personal security (I'm not sure if that's what you're really getting after, so my apologies if this is misguided), you can always use a Tor network. If you use Firefox, you can use Torbutton for one click enabling. It has the benefit (drawback, to some), of disabling Flash because it's otherwise impossible to protect against Flash information leaks.
You can usually determine which language the user speaks through the Accept-Language HTTP header.
You can determine whether certain applications and browser plugins are installed by looking at the Accept HTTP header.
Browser version/patchlevel and .NET framework version through the User-Agent HTTP header.
Your ISP/Employer and geographical location through IP address.
Whether or not you have visited particular URLs through CSS and/or timing load events. If a particular website has user-specific URIs, this could disclose whether you are a certain user on that site or not.
Which fonts are available through measuring ems and/or Flash.
Screen resolution, window size, timezone through JavaScript.
Where you move your mouse and keystrokes through JavaScript. For instance, you can see what people type into text boxes even if they don't hit submit.
Many UserJS/Greasemonkey scripts leak information (e.g. if you filter out certain people, the sites it is configured for may be able to find out who).
Can the browser support JS
Can the browser support flash
Operating system platform
Screen resolution
Supports CSS
Supports tables
I need to dig up the link, but if the user is using IE, with common software titles installed, determining which ones are installed is possible.
As far as I know, it's possible to get clipboard data via javascript. Not sure how possible it is by default these days, but it was all the rage not long ago. I do believe IE still allows it.
People have a habit of leaving very important data in their clipboard, so this is pretty bad.
late to the party here, the website can also scan your ports, to find what software you are running!

Resources