Google Chrome extensions

You probably have to hack Chromium (or at least the profile folder manually) to get some of these things; no advanced settings, chrome:// flags, command-line parameters, or gpedit.msc policies for them.

Which is why I have Always Clear Downloads, BackspaceMeansBackspace, History Limiter, and Mailto:. These are probably the only things I somewhat miss from Firefox.

 

It's seems a bit odd that Google hasn't implemented this option. Oh well, not a big deal.

Let us all thank the browser gods for open source extensibility.

I might as well add something to the thread. I've been using the ViewTube script here lately watching HTML5 with it on YouTube. http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/87011
It's working pretty good so far.

 

Google extending Chrome support for XP users until April 2015, at least.
http://googleenterprise.blogspot.com/2013/10/extending-chrome-support-for-xp-users.html

 

Anyone using these extensions:
Edit This Cookie
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/edit-this-cookie/fngmhnnpilhplaeedifhccceomclgfbg

Avast Online Security (any way to set this to block sites, not just warn?)
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/avast-online-security/gomekmidlodglbbmalcneegieacbdmki

 

I realize it's late in the game, but I found this post thanks to a net search. I have a *similar* problem with LastPass and CsFire, even though LastPass is set to "Automatically Logoff when all browsers are closed and Chrome has been closed for (mins) 0".

I have contacted the developer, as suggested by tlu.

 

Thanks downloaded from chrome, now only using PDF Viewer and Adguard extensions with Chromium

 

Well, I had used pdf.js for a while and it worked well but I moved back to the built-in PDF reader for the reasons outlined here.

Re Adguard: I tried it and removed it again. I don't know if the memory footprint is lower than with Adblock, but I did not notice that websites are loaded any faster. On the other hand, in Adblock I can see the list of blockable items and can easily define exception rules. Adguard doesn't have that feature (unless I overlooked it). That's why I'm curious why you prefer it over Adblock.

 

I am using Chromium in stead of Chrome, therefore I lack the build in PDF and PPAPI-flash of Chrome. So for me it is the choice between this PDF-viewer or Adobe-PDF. I disabled adobe reader plug-in for chromium with custom Group Policy template

Reasons for using Chromium over Chrome is security of broker process and privacy. I have set UAC to allow elevation to signed programs only. The broker process of Chromium is unsigned. PPAPI flash has better security, but on Windows it used segment virtualisation of the CPU, I have a simple E52000 dual core on my old desktop with no CPU virtualisation, so do not benefit of the double sandbox feature of PPAPI.

I have applied the 1806 trick, so no executable can be downloaded until I change this switch. There fore not needing reputation malware protection. Enabling Chromiums phising and malware protection is enabling google tracking.

AsGuard extension has phising protection, it checks both google, WOT and it seems to include the AdblockPlus malware domain list when you select the syware and tracking filter. Have not run a check on Adguard network traffic, but it seems to run through google API. Adguard seems to do a nice job on URL blocking as well.

 

Just a quick question. You don't need to have the virtualization feature of the CPU enabled in the BIOS to support segment virtualization of ppapi flash (it is disabled by default anyway)?

 

Thx for noticing, but it is simply not there, see pic. It is an old-refurbished PC, because friends were buying newer stuff (the Mobo + CPU, the fanless GPU and even an SSD drive), Due to the SSD drive I even have not bothered buying new.

 

Segmentation is used to separate areas of address space from each other. I believe it is only available on 32bit ie: x86. On 64bit they use guard pages and a few other tricks to attempt a separation. It should be unrelated to virtualization, only to the architecture of the CPU. Anything P4 (maybe even earlier) that is x86 should have segmentation.

 

@Windows_Security

It was not meant as a comment but rather as a question, if virtualization technology needs to be enabled in the BIOS in order for segmentation to function properly.

@Hunry Man

Thank you.

 

That's interesting, I did not know. Are you sure about it?

Thanks.

 

The phishing and malware protection always checks a local list first. *If* you do not get a hit on the local list it sends a *partial* hash to Google, and *that* is checked against their database. Not really destroying ones privacy.

 

More details here.

 

Philippe, the developer, has been very kind and fast:

The remote policy rules should update automatically but in case can be updated manually from the preferences panel.
Now I am using CsFire and LastPass without experiencing any problem.

 

Yes, he is. I had contacted him earlier.

The remote policy rules are updated but I had this warning again that the server couldn't be contacted. That new rule obviously doesn't solve the problem. And as a matter of fact I had added an equivalent local rule before with the same result

 

Why the Adguard extension? Seems lacking. -http://adguard.com/en/blog/?p=61

How it differs from the full version of Adguard:

The ad gets hidden but is still loaded onto the computer:
There is a risk of being infected with viruses disseminated through the ad networks.
You pay for the traffic used to load the ad.
The ad gets hidden at the last stage of page load which may cause the pages to display at a slower speed.
Approximately 30-35% of the ads cannot be blocked due to the technical restrictions imposed on the extensions.
Limited protection against phishing and malicious pages:
Due to the restrictions imposed on the extension, the page is loaded prior to being checked, therefore, the possibility of phishing and virus attacks is not completely eliminated.
Checking is done only for the page you are going to whereas in the full version of Adguard, all links from which something is loaded get checked.

As far as I know the Adblock or Adblock Plus extensions do not hide ads.

 

My Chrome Browser just auto updated to Google Chrome Beta for Windows 32.0.1700.72 instead of the Stable Update.

 

Did anyone notice that some of extensions cannot be found directly in the Chrome Store but you have to google them first and access them from Google search results?

For instance extension "Google Mail Multi-Account Checker". When searching for this extension in the Store I get zero result. However when I google this extension I get a link to the store that brings me to the extension. This extension is just an example. I know many such extensions which cannot be accessed via Google Store but are accessible via Google search.

 

Very good that you brought that up! I had also read that, and I think those issues are definitely show-stoppers.

Exactly. Most ads are not downloaded, indeed. Only for ads that are embedded in websites as text there are element hidung rules.

 

You may want to uninstall AdGuard if you want privacy. I don't know if I understand this correctly but I think AdGuard, queries check for sites you visit via http and without encoding the url. I think this means it is sent in pure text. (Again I am not sure if I understand this correctly). I found this out using HTTP Switchboard.

 

one problem with Chrome is i find the scrollbar almost invisible because it is too pale.
so on long pages it's hard to find where you are by looking at the scrollbar.

there are extensions for that but if you are like me i prefer not to install extensions if there are other ways around it.

all you have to do is edit the CSS stylesheet for Chrome, located in:
C:\Users\username\AppData\Local\Google\Chrome\User Data\Default\User StyleSheets

all the instructions are here:
http://www.gtricks.com/chrome/scroll-bar-without-extension/

some examples:

 

Thanks for this moontan! I've darkened the scrollbar. It's much easier to see now