Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Vulnerabilities / Threats

Top Google Chrome Extensions Leak Data

Study of 100 extensions found that 27% leave users vulnerable to Web or Wi-Fi attack.

10 Massive Security Breaches
(click image for larger view)
Slideshow: 10 Massive Security Breaches
A review of 100 Google Chrome extensions, including the 50 most popular selections, found that 27% of them contain one or more vulnerabilities that could be exploited by attackers either via the Web or unsecured Wi-Fi hotspots.

Those findings come from a study being conducted by security researchers Adrienne Porter Felt, Nicholas Carlini, and Prateek Saxena at University of California, Berkeley. In particular, they analyzed the 50 most popular Chrome extensions, as well as 50 others selected at random, for JavaScript injection vulnerabilities, since such bugs can enable an attacker to take complete control of an extension.

The researchers found that 27 of the 100 extensions studied contained one or more injection vulnerabilities, for a total of 51 vulnerabilities across all of the extensions. The researchers also said that seven of the vulnerable extensions were used by 300,000 people or more.

"Bugs in extensions put users at risk by leaking private information (like passwords and history) to Web and Wi-Fi attackers," they said. "Websites may be evil or contain malicious content from users or advertisers. Attackers on public Wi-Fi networks (like in coffee shops and airports) can change all HTTP content."

[ Threats can come from many different routes. Learn how Social Engineering Attacks Pose As Corporate Copiers ]

The researchers sent vulnerability warnings to all relevant developers, and so far two related patches have been released. One involved Twitter's Silver Bird extension (version 1.9.7.9), which had a vulnerability that an attacker could use to hide scripts in the data feed sent to Twitter, although the micro-blogging service appears to sanitize all incoming data against attack. Regardless, the vulnerability was fixed with the release of version 1.9.8.4 of Silver Bird.

Another vulnerability was resolved by Google updating OpenAttribute--used to help people read websites' Creative Commons (CC) licenses--from version 0.6 to 0.7, with the new version locking down the extension's security. According to the Berkeley team's OpenAttribute extension vulnerability disclosure to Google in July, a successful exploit of the vulnerability could allow an attacker to spoof a user's identity when making HTTP requests. In addition, they said, "a malicious website could serve a fake CC license that includes inline scripts, or a Wi-Fi attacker could insert inline scripts into a license provided by a legitimate website like Wikipedia. The inserted code then runs in the extension's popup window with the extension's privileges."

The extension vulnerabilities detailed to date are part of a larger study into Google Chrome security. The full study, to be released in two months, will name and include full details about all of the vulnerable extensions discovered. "We haven't released all of the vulnerable extension names because some of the very popular ones are still unpatched, and we're giving them some time to get fixed," according to a blog post from security researcher Adrienne Porter Felt at Berkeley.

The interest in browser extension security reflects the fact that as browser makers--including Microsoft--have become more adept at securing their code (to say nothing of Microsoft also improving Windows security), attackers have turned their attention to exploiting vulnerabilities in the third-party code--including add-ons and extensions--used by browsers.

Security professionals often view compliance as a burden, but it doesn't have to be that way. In this report, we show the security team how to partner with the compliance pros. Download the report here. (Free registration required.)

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
YMOM100
50%
50%
YMOM100,
User Rank: Apprentice
10/26/2011 | 9:04:16 AM
re: Top Google Chrome Extensions Leak Data
Why don't you write out the extensions that you've found leak data?! Does't say anything in the report either!
jrapoza
50%
50%
jrapoza,
User Rank: Apprentice
9/29/2011 | 8:52:56 PM
re: Top Google Chrome Extensions Leak Data
How does this compare with Firefox and its many extensions? Would Firefox do worse (there have definitely been past examples of Firefox extensions with security issues), would it do better, or worse?
To a certain degree, as with mobile app stores and general operating systems, there is a certain amount of risk with anything that you install to your browser.

Jim Rapoza is an InformationWeek Contributing Editor
Commentary
What the FedEx Logo Taught Me About Cybersecurity
Matt Shea, Head of Federal @ MixMode,  6/4/2021
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
A View From Inside a Deception
Sara Peters, Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  6/2/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
The State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
In this report learn how enterprises are building their incident response teams and processes, how they research potential compromises, how they respond to new breaches, and what tools and processes they use to remediate problems and improve their cyber defenses for the future.
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Developing Secure Applications
How Enterprises are Developing Secure Applications
Recent breaches of third-party apps are driving many organizations to think harder about the security of their off-the-shelf software as they continue to move left in secure software development practices.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-23394
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-13
The package studio-42/elfinder before 2.1.58 are vulnerable to Remote Code Execution (RCE) via execution of PHP code in a .phar file. NOTE: This only applies if the server parses .phar files as PHP.
CVE-2021-34682
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-12
Receita Federal IRPF 2021 1.7 allows a man-in-the-middle attack against the update feature.
CVE-2021-31811
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-12
In Apache PDFBox, a carefully crafted PDF file can trigger an OutOfMemory-Exception while loading the file. This issue affects Apache PDFBox version 2.0.23 and prior 2.0.x versions.
CVE-2021-31812
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-12
In Apache PDFBox, a carefully crafted PDF file can trigger an infinite loop while loading the file. This issue affects Apache PDFBox version 2.0.23 and prior 2.0.x versions.
CVE-2021-32552
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-12
It was discovered that read_file() in apport/hookutils.py would follow symbolic links or open FIFOs. When this function is used by the openjdk-16 package apport hooks, it could expose private data to other local users.