TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Malware in the browser: how you might get hacked by a Chrome extension

127 点作者 kjaer将近 9 年前

16 条评论

Hamcha将近 9 年前
If you like to tweak your Chrome install, check out:<p>chrome:&#x2F;&#x2F;flags&#x2F;#extension-active-script-permission<p>It adds an extra level of permission where each extension that doesn&#x27;t ask for a specific website is, by default, locked out of every website, and you have to enable it manually by either clicking on it, whitelisting the websites where it can run or globally (example pic, sorry for not being in english: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;puu.sh&#x2F;q5QFR&#x2F;d6004da3bb.png" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;puu.sh&#x2F;q5QFR&#x2F;d6004da3bb.png</a>)
评论 #12115714 未加载
评论 #12116274 未加载
lorenzhs将近 9 年前
A big problem is also with unmaintained extensions that are being bought my malicious players (or developers&#x27; accounts hijacked), which then slap on an adware script and push a new version. That way, a previously good extension with a legitimate reason for &quot;accessing your data on all websites&quot; can silently become malicious.
评论 #12117756 未加载
the_duke将近 9 年前
The issue with Chrome extensions, just like with android apps, is that people never check the permissions and just click OK.<p>Extensions make it even easier to install them, though, just need to redirect a user.<p>I&#x27;ve also come upon some spam sites that try to get you to install extensions with annoying alerts that prevent you from closing the page, playing a recorded message &quot;To close the page, just install the XX extension&quot;.<p>The only remedy is good screening in the app stores. Actually, for apps&#x2F;extensions installed from the official repository, I would be OK with remote removal. This would probably spark an outcry from certain parties, but as long as it does not extend to manually installed extensions it&#x27;s acceptable to me.
评论 #12116980 未加载
评论 #12117294 未加载
评论 #12115966 未加载
评论 #12116069 未加载
评论 #12115615 未加载
评论 #12115502 未加载
gnicholas将近 9 年前
My company has a Chrome&#x2F;Firefox extension with ~60k users. We have been approached repeatedly by companies that want us to add in their tracking snippet to our extension. What they offered—tens of thousands of dollars every year—was tempting, but we didn&#x27;t take the bait.<p>They were opaque with us about what the code did (they didn&#x27;t share the actual code without NDA, and we never got that far). But I did get to see the snippet they wanted us to add to our privacy policy, which was devilishly opaque. It arguably disclosed everything that would be done, but it did so in a way that sounded very benign.<p>I googled some phrases from the privacy policy insert and found that they had in fact gotten several extensions to include the code. Scary.
评论 #12131824 未加载
stockkid将近 9 年前
Thanks for raising awareness of the possible danger of Chrome extension as a malware. I recently built my first Chrome extension and was amazed by what harm an extension could do if the maker had bad intension.<p>The danger is that many people do not pay much attention to the requested permissions.<p>To fight the issue, I think there should be a culture of open sourcing Chrome extensions. I open sourced mine, and if I build one again, I would.
评论 #12118926 未加载
ungzd将近 9 年前
Extensions like this are just the same as .exe adware downloaded and installed by user (not automatically).<p>More serious problem is legitimate extensions that are trusted by lots of users then being sold to some rogue company, then lots of users receive malware with update.
评论 #12115811 未加载
评论 #12116285 未加载
评论 #12115722 未加载
Noseshine将近 9 年前
I&#x27;m not sure, so this is not really an accusation, but I think I had such problems with BetterTTV (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;chrome.google.com&#x2F;webstore&#x2F;detail&#x2F;betterttv&#x2F;ajopnjidmegmdimjlfnijceegpefgped" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;chrome.google.com&#x2F;webstore&#x2F;detail&#x2F;betterttv&#x2F;ajopnjid...</a>), a Chrome extension for Twitch chat.<p>I had trouble with Google suddenly asking me to prove I&#x27;m not a bot - for months. I ended up buying a new router because my old one hadn&#x27;t seen any updates in ages, just in case that got hacked.<p>Long story short, after some experimenting the only thing that seemed to shut Google up was to disable this extension.<p>This extension <i>does</i> load code from a remote site, they write it is because having new releases approved takes too long so this is how they work around it. I had BTTV report a newer version number than there was in the Chrome Web Store for that reason.<p>I don&#x27;t understand they are allowed to do that, quite openly even? It defeats the purpose of the Chrome Web Store and any guarantees by Google are worthless if extensions can just load some of their code from somewhere else.<p>Now, this extension actually <i>is</i> open source (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;night&#x2F;BetterTTV" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;night&#x2F;BetterTTV</a>) and I have not read about any suspicions like mine from anyone else. Still, as I said above, Google only stopped asking me to verify I&#x27;m no robot after disabling this extension, and I tried several times (on&#x2F;off).<p>And the code loading happens quite officially, I first read it on the extensions developer website itself. From their github README:<p><pre><code> &gt; Files not included in the repo are pulled from the actual server, &gt; so everything works.</code></pre>
anonymousDan将近 9 年前
Google gave a good overview of the screening they perform for extensions in a paper at usenix security last year: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.usenix.org&#x2F;conference&#x2F;usenixsecurity15&#x2F;technical-sessions&#x2F;presentation&#x2F;jagpal" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.usenix.org&#x2F;conference&#x2F;usenixsecurity15&#x2F;technical...</a><p>Basically, at their scale it&#x27;s a hard problem, especially if you need to redo your analysis after every update to an extension and you can&#x27;t afford a high false positive rate.
评论 #12120020 未加载
NobleSir将近 9 年前
4ish years ago I had an old, unupdated netbook get infected with conduit extension, which spread through the sync mechanism to my newer laptops.
cloudjacker将近 9 年前
There have been extensions out for years that would swap bitcoin addresses with their own one. Extensions unrelated to bitcoin
Herrera将近 9 年前
A somewhat related topic:<p>A few months ago Google fixed a vulnerability on the inline installation. It was possible to start a install on the attacker&#x27;s website and then redirect the page to an arbitrary one. This would confuse the user, making him believe that the install came from the arbitrary page.<p>Here is the PoC if anyone is interested (CVE-2016-1640): <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=f_9ObDqBoo8" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=f_9ObDqBoo8</a>
mistat将近 9 年前
Great article, i like the in-depth analysis of how this actually works. Cheers for the share.
616c将近 9 年前
This example is hilarious, granted, but not even the one I truly worry about.<p>I work in a lax multi-national corporate environment, to be vague. These extensions, especially with religiously conservative adults, is of limited concern.<p>I am far more concerned about the semi-professional extensions.<p>I doubt this is malicious, but someone installed this in my environment and inquried why the quality of output went down (in terms of pixelation).<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;chrome.google.com&#x2F;webstore&#x2F;search&#x2F;screenshot?hl=en-US" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;chrome.google.com&#x2F;webstore&#x2F;search&#x2F;screenshot?hl=en-U...</a><p>The problem here is it raises fewer eyebrows. It does a purpose-filled operation professionals would need, and they are far less discerning than me.<p>This person had Adobe Acrobat Pro, and forgot. Such extensions have real potential to IOC (indicators of compromise), but only very expensive next-generation malware detection knows that when it sees traffic out.<p>But what if there is no traffic out? Or it does a more professional job with exfil?<p>Most modern software inventory has no intelligence into plugins. That is terrifying. Per-user javascript directories? Enumerating just the obvious ones can be a full-time job?<p>What about dupes? I am the only one I know in my department who uses uBlock ... Origin. And I know there is a fork. Others are intended to have a similar logo and fool busy professionals.<p>I love FF, but also use Chromium. I am worried that the freedom afforded to me by the beauty of things like Keysnail, like the generally abstracted trend of vendor lockdown, forces me to voluntarily suck it up and deal with crap software defaults and workflows, and doubly recommend the same to people in my environment. I will increasingly have to part with each of the limited extensions I like, all while people here push Electron apps. I like them (who am I to be arrogant and judge the work of these people half my age; at least they put out code while I bitch all day), but the browser base is not discernibly updated or managed unless some developers coordinate. I am sure that came or is coming down the line, but currently populars apps will play catch up while people like me are forced to preemptively yet again restrict use of likeable tech because security was an afterthought.<p>Qubes increasingly looks like the future. It is sad, but I must every few years consume more resources of my computer for useful, but wasteful, separation of software from its self, because, well, queue the recently retracted Theo de Raadt &quot;x86 virtualization being secure is a waste of time&quot; trope rescinded because even his OpenBSD crew will bite the bullet and work on OpenBSD virt technology.<p>I just depressed myself.<p>Sincerely, Guy running multiple browsers in Firejail in a VM<p>EDIT: I do not the difference between have and half apparently; probably a sign of my age, haha!
jamiesonbecker将近 9 年前
This article actually indicates a (probably bug-bounty&#x27;able) flaw in the Chrome webstore security checks:<p>&gt; The script that it fetches from the above server is a malware payload. The extension needs to download it after having been installed because it cannot ship with the payload if it wants to pass through the Chrome Webstore’s security checks.<p>There probably are legitimate reasons to pull in remote content, but I can&#x27;t think of any that can&#x27;t be worked around. You&#x27;d think that Google&#x27;s own malware tracking would pick up <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;104.131.35.136:9999&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;104.131.35.136:9999&#x2F;</a> as a bad site, but the malware author takes care to hide that delivery mechanism behind a header check.<p>So, to me, ANY request or evals by extensions should (at the very least) be detected and constitute a separate permissions category, or, better yet, BLOCKED <i>as a violation of same origin policy.</i>
评论 #12115873 未加载
_Understated_将近 9 年前
I am surprised that no one has mentioned this: Google can remove an extension that is installed in your computer at any time!<p>Doesn&#x27;t anyone else see that as incredibly overreaching?
jlarocco将近 9 年前
The biggest surprise to me is that this has so many up votes on HN.<p>Getting &quot;hacked&quot; by a sleazy browser extension is about as surprising as getting a virus after installing something from a warez site.