In order to mitigate a large class of potental cross-site scripting issues, Chrome's extension system has incorporated the general concept of Content Security Policy (CSP) . This introduces some fairly strict policies that will make extensions more secure by default, and provides you with the ability to create and enforce rules governing the types of content that can be loaded and executed by your extensions and applications.
In general, CSP works as a black/whitelisting mechanism for resources loaded or executed by your extensions. Defining a reasonable policy for your extension enables you to carefully consider the resources that your extension requires, and to ask the browser to ensure that those are the only resources your extension has access to. These policies provide security over and above the host permissions your extension requests; they're an additional layer of protection, not a replacement.
On the web, such a policy is defined via an HTTP header or meta
element. Inside Chrome's extension system, neither is an appropriate
mechanism. Instead, an extension's policy is defined via the extension's
manifest.json file as follows:
{
...,
"content_security_policy": "[POLICY STRING GOES HERE]"
...
}
For full details regarding CSP's syntax, please take a look at the Content Security Policy specification .
Packages that do not define a
manifest_version
have no default content security policy. Those that select
manifest_version 2, have a default content security policy
of:
script-src 'self'; object-src 'self'
This policy adds security by limiting extensions and applications in two ways:
Inline JavaScript, as well as dangerous string-to-JavaScript methods like
eval, will not be executed. This restriction bans both inline
<script> blocks and inline event handlers
(e.g. <button onclick="...">).
The first restriction wipes out a huge class of cross-site scripting attacks
by making it impossible for you to accidentally execute script provided by a
malicious third-party. It does, however, require you to write your code with a
clean separation between content and behavior (which you should of course do
anyway, right?). An example might make this clearer. You might try to write a
Browser Action's popup as a single
popup.html containing:
<!doctype html>
<html>
<head>
<title>My Awesome Popup!</title>
<script>
function awesome() {
// do something awesome!
}
function totallyAwesome() {
// do something TOTALLY awesome!
}
function clickHandler(element) {
setTimeout("awesome(); totallyAwesome()", 1000);
}
</script>
</head>
<body>
<button onclick="clickHandler(this)">
Click for awesomeness!
</button>
</body>
</html>
Three things will need to change in order to make this work the way you expect it to:
clickHandler definition needs to move into an external
JavaScript file (popup.js would be a good target).
addEventListener and extracted into popup.js.
setTimeout call will need to be rewritten to avoid
converting the string "awesome(); totallyAwesome()" into
JavaScript for execution.
Those changes might look something like the following:
popup.js:
=========
function awesome() {
// Do something awesome!
}
function totallyAwesome() {
// do something TOTALLY awesome!
}
function awesomeTask() {
awesome();
totallyAwesome();
}
function clickHandler(e) {
setTimeout(awesomeTask, 1000);
}
// Add event listeners once the DOM has fully loaded by listening for the
// `DOMContentLoaded` event on the document, and adding your listeners to
// specific elements when it triggers.
document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', function () {
document.querySelector('button').addEventListener('click', clickHandler);
});
popup.html:
===========
<!doctype html>
<html>
<head>
<title>My Awesome Popup!</title>
<script src="popup.js"></script>
</script>
</head>
<body>
<button>Click for awesomeness!</button>
</body>
</html>
Script and object resources can only be loaded from the extension's package, not from the web at large. This ensures that your extension only executes the code you've specifically approved, preventing an active network attacker from maliciously redirecting your request for a resource.
Instead of writing code that depends on jQuery (or any other library) loading from an external CDN, consider including the specific version of jQuery in your extension package. That is, instead of:
<!doctype html>
<html>
<head>
<title>My Awesome Popup!</title>
<script src="http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.7.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
</script>
</head>
<body>
<button>Click for awesomeness!</button>
</body>
</html>
Download the file, include it in your package, and write:
<!doctype html>
<html>
<head>
<title>My Awesome Popup!</title>
<script src="jquery.min.js"></script>
</script>
</head>
<body>
<button>Click for awesomeness!</button>
</body>
</html>
There is no mechanism for relaxing the restriction against executing inline
JavaScript. In particular, setting a script policy that includes
unsafe-inline will have no effect. This is intentional.
If, on the other hand, you have a need for some external JavaScript or object resources, you can relax the policy to a limited extent by whitelisting specific HTTPS origins from which scripts should be accepted. Whitelisting insecure HTTP resources will have no effect. This is intentional, because we want to ensure that executable resources loaded with an extension's elevated permissions is exactly the resource you expect, and hasn't been replaced by an active network attacker. As man-in-the-middle attacks are both trivial and undetectable over HTTP, only HTTPS origins will be accepted.
A relaxed policy definition which allows script resources to be loaded from
example.com over HTTPS might look like:
{
...,
"content_security_policy": "script-src 'self' https://example.com; object-src 'self'",
...
}
Note that both script-src and object-src are defined
by the policy. Chrome will not accept a policy that doesn't limit each of
these values to (at least) 'self'.
Making use of Google Analytics is the canonical example for this sort of policy definition. It's common enough that we've provided an Analytics boilerplate of sorts in the Event Tracking with Google Analytics sample extension, and a brief tutorial that goes into more detail.
You may, of course, tighten this policy to whatever extent your extension
allows in order to increase security at the expense of convenience. To specify
that your extension can only load resources of any type (images, etc)
from its own package, for example, a policy of default-src 'self'
would be appropriate. The Mappy sample
extension is a good example of an extension that's been locked down above and
beyond the defaults.