Many Chrome browser extensions do sneaky things

A study of 48,000 Chrome extensions uncovers ad fraud, data theft and other misdeeds

An analysis by security researchers of 48,000 extensions for Google's Chrome browser uncovered many that are used for fraud and data theft, actions that are mostly undetectable to regular users.

The study, due to be presented Thursday at the Usenix Security Symposium in San Diego, forecasts growing security problems around extensions as cybercriminals tap into the rich data contained in Web browsers for profit.

They found 130 outright malicious extensions and 4,712 suspicious ones, engaged in a variety of affiliate fraud, credential theft, advertising fraud and social network abuse.

"By installing an extension, you will not see any malicious behavior," said Alexandros Kapravelos, a doctoral candidate at the University of California at Santa Barbara, in a phone interview. "You need to visit specific pages to trigger the malicious behavior."

The researchers developed a system called Hulk, which closely watches how browser extensions behave when interacting with websites. Part of that involved creating so-called "HoneyPages," which are specially crafted Web pages designed to tease out bad behavior.

Because extensions add extra functionality to the browser, they need a lot of power. Extensions often ask for a variety of permissions that come from Chrome's APIs (application programming interfaces).

For example, extensions can intercept Web requests from the browser and modify traffic and inject JavaScript into Web pages.

"That is just way too powerful," Kapravelos said. "We need to be way more careful into which extensions we give these permissions."

During the study, the researchers worked closely with Google. The company does review extensions before they're allowed in Chrome's Web Store, but it hasn't stopped some of the bad ones from getting in.

In light of the study, Google has implemented several changes to strengthen its control over extensions. It is now harder to install extensions from outside the Web Store, a practice known as "side loading," said Chris Grier, a security researcher with the University of California at Berkeley and a co-author of the study.

Very few extensions were found that try to interfere with online banking sessions or logged keystrokes, Grier said. But further analysis might reveal bad behaviors that are well-hidden, he added.

Some of the suspicious extensions they studied have been downloaded millions of times.

One extension aimed at Chinese users that has been downloaded 5.5 million times uses a tracking beacon to report all the Web pages a person has visited to a remote server. Those reports are not sent encrypted over SSL (Secure Sockets Layer).

"While this isn't malicious per se, it certainly exposes Chinese users to a whole new set of risks," Grier said. "Now all of their content is no longer encrypted, and there are no confidentiality guarantees. Even for users outside of China, there's certainly a lot of risk in having every http request reported back to some server."

In another example, some extensions changed or added parameters within a URL in order to accomplish affiliate fraud.

Companies such as Amazon will pay a small fee to webmasters, known as affiliates, when someone clicks a link on their website that leads to a sale. That is tracked by adding an affiliate code inside a URL.

Some extensions will swap out the legitimate affiliate code for their own, effectively gaining fraudulent credit for the sale. Since Google saw the study, it has moved to crack down on affiliate fraud in its policy governing extensions, Grier said.

They also found examples of extensions swapping out advertisements on a website for their own in order to get the fees. Sometimes extensions swapped out banner ads, injected ads into ad-free sites such as Wikipedia or overlaid ads on top of website content.

The study was also co-authored by Neha Chachra, Christopher Kruegel, Giovanni Vigna and Vern Paxson.

Send news tips and comments to jeremy_kirk@idg.com. Follow me on Twitter: @jeremy_kirk

Join the Good Gear Guide newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.

Tags USENIXapplicationsGooglesecuritybrowserssoftware

Our Back to Business guide highlights the best products for you to boost your productivity at home, on the road, at the office, or in the classroom.

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

Jeremy Kirk

IDG News Service
Show Comments

Cool Tech

Crucial Ballistix Elite 32GB Kit (4 x 8GB) DDR4-3000 UDIMM

Learn more >

Gadgets & Things

Lexar® Professional 1000x microSDHC™/microSDXC™ UHS-II cards

Learn more >

Family Friendly

Lexar® JumpDrive® S57 USB 3.0 flash drive 

Learn more >

Stocking Stuffer

Plox Star Wars Death Star Levitating Bluetooth Speaker

Learn more >

Christmas Gift Guide

Click for more ›

Most Popular Reviews

Latest News Articles

Resources

GGG Evaluation Team

Kathy Cassidy

STYLISTIC Q702

First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.

Anthony Grifoni

STYLISTIC Q572

For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.

Steph Mundell

LIFEBOOK UH574

The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.

Andrew Mitsi

STYLISTIC Q702

The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.

Simon Harriott

STYLISTIC Q702

My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.

Featured Content

Latest Jobs

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?