Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Thu 23 Nov 2017, 22:14
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Additional Software (PETs, n' stuff) » Browsers and Internet
Google Chrome 64-bit SFS packages
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 14 of 14 [205 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 12, 13, 14
Author Message
quirkian2new

Joined: 06 Oct 2015
Posts: 92
Location: on the inter-planet train

PostPosted: Sat 28 Oct 2017, 20:07    Post subject:
Subject description: malware extension or malware browser
 

hello Mike and fellow google-chrome users,

I downloaded your google-chrome58 and made a sfs which contains all my favorite extensions,
adblockplus,and better-browser for chrome.

when doing a search on google, Better browser-for chrome automaticall display the next page when you reach
the bottom of a page. This saves the trouble of clicking on next page and make search more efficient.
when i want to go into details, i simple right click the item selected and let it open in a new tab. So
adblockplus,and better-browser for chrome combination makes search on google very efficient.

During the past 2 days, when i am browsing with this google-chrome58.sfs a box suddenly appear at the right upper corner
saying that this better browser-for chrome extension is automatically disabled. The box asked for my confirmation, but
it is just disabled no matter i confirm or not. And the extension CANNOT be re-activated again in any manner. I don't think this extension has any harm or malware. I have been using it quite a long time(since google-chrome29 on Fatdog630)

Is it a bad thing once again done by google ? The extension developer
has spent a lot of effort developing extensions, how can it be just disabled "unilaterally". Is the extension contain
a malware OR google-chrome contain malicious malware ? I am not a coder, i just want effifiency in my search.

Finally i think i am the only one to decide whether the extension should be disabled, not google nor google-chrome.

anyone has similar experience ?
Screenshot.jpg
 Description   
 Filesize   31.51 KB
 Viewed   228 Time(s)

Screenshot.jpg


Last edited by quirkian2new on Sat 28 Oct 2017, 20:56; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
dancytron

Joined: 18 Jul 2012
Posts: 942

PostPosted: Sat 28 Oct 2017, 20:45    Post subject:  

FWIW, when Google just doesn't like an extension (like ones that download youtube videos e.g. http://addoncrop.com/youtube_video_downloader/), they don't disable them. They just remove them from the Chrome Store. So, yours might really have malware.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
quirkian2new

Joined: 06 Oct 2015
Posts: 92
Location: on the inter-planet train

PostPosted: Sat 28 Oct 2017, 21:49    Post subject:  

I reboot computer and started google-chrome.sfs again, this extension still there and still works.
I did another search, it still works. But when it reaches the end of page5 , the confirmation
box again appear at the upper right corner and again this extension is disabled and page6 is never
automatically displayed(see the captured screenshot).

Maybe this extension filtered google ads so that the google server dislike it ? Maybe...maybe...

I really dont know..........
Screenshot.jpg
 Description   
 Filesize   73.97 KB
 Viewed   208 Time(s)

Screenshot.jpg

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 3150
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Sun 29 Oct 2017, 08:30    Post subject:  

dancytron wrote:
FWIW, when Google just doesn't like an extension (like ones that download youtube videos e.g. http://addoncrop.com/youtube_video_downloader/), they don't disable them. They just remove them from the Chrome Store. So, yours might really have malware.


@ quirkian2new:-

Dan's absolutely right. Any extension/app you have installed from the Store that Google have decided they don't like just gets removed. End of story.

Because it's installed to Chrome (in the /root/.config/google-chrome directory), it will still continue to work locally. But the first you'll be aware of something not being quite right is usually when a warning pop-up appears (and things are not behaving themselves).

If you're a long-term Chrome user, like me, you'll be aware that at start-up, there's always a burst of network activity. This is Chrome 'phoning home' to the mother-ship, Google, and checking that your browser is performing within Google's 'accepted' parameters..!! Rolling Eyes All part of the Google 'Big Brother' we-know-better-than-you mentality.....which is supposedly for your own good.

(Do remember that the vast majority of Chrome users are running it under Windows.....and many Windows users don't have the faintest idea about safety & security, and how to implement it.)

This behaviour is not, of course, confined to Chrome alone. All of the Chromium-based browsers exhibit the exact same behaviour.....especially if you're using a Google a/c.


Mike. Wink

_________________
If I've helped you.....please say 'Thanks'!
MY PUPPY PACKAGES
--------------------------------------

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 3150
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Wed 01 Nov 2017, 14:00    Post subject:  

Evening, boys & girls.

Following a revelation earlier on today from belham2 on how he runs the newest version of Chrome as 'spot' (and with full sandboxing, too!), I am happy to be able to offer Google Chrome 62.0.3202.75.

This is why the delay since the last release from me. I've been trying all sorts of ways to tame Chrome 62, and get it to behave itself.....to no avail. Belham's method, however, works beautifully. (I have to make use of code developed by others, I'm afraid; my own coding skills are rudimentary at best...) Embarassed Rolling Eyes

It's not perfect, I'm afraid. It still crashes when you try to upload/download anything (or maybe that's just my machine - I couldn't honestly say!).....but for general browsing, and listening to/watching streaming audio/video, it's fine. I think I know what needs doing to make it quit crashing, but I haven't had a lot of spare time recently.....so I thought I'd at least let y'all know the thread isn't dead.

Temporarily I'm using the Axel Download Accelerator, compiled from smokey01's instructions in the latest Puppy Newsletter, along with the GUI so kindly provided. Works great, too!

There's still life here!

-----------------------------------------------------------

As before, the new libnss and associated dependencies live in their own folder within the /chrome directory, given preference over the system versions via LD_PRELOAD; this is to keep the new versions from interfering with apps that still require the older ones to function. Also, credit where it's due; once again, grateful thanks to battleshooter for his timely assistance with this.

NetFlix is working fine, and PepperFlash auto-updates as it has done for several releases now, so.....enjoy.

Any probs other than the upload/download issue, you know where to find me. I will get it sorted soon, promise.....but if you're not suffering from this particular hitch, feedback on that would also be appreciated, too.


Mike. Wink

_________________
If I've helped you.....please say 'Thanks'!
MY PUPPY PACKAGES
--------------------------------------

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 3150
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Thu 02 Nov 2017, 16:57    Post subject:  

Evening, all.

Now we're back in the swing of things..!

Currently testing the 'beta' of Chrome 63.0.3239.30. NetFlix fine; Pepper working A-OK. At present, everything looking very smooth. No issues to report.


Mike. Wink

_________________
If I've helped you.....please say 'Thanks'!
MY PUPPY PACKAGES
--------------------------------------

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
jake29

Joined: 24 Jul 2015
Posts: 104

PostPosted: Fri 03 Nov 2017, 07:36    Post subject:  

Thanks Mike, your continued support is appreciated. 62.0.3202.75 working well in FatDog64 out-of-the-box.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 3150
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Fri 03 Nov 2017, 08:49    Post subject:  

Hi, Jake.

jake29 wrote:
Thanks Mike, your continued support is appreciated. 62.0.3202.75 working well in FatDog64 out-of-the-box.


Ah, I'm pleased to hear that. Does FatDog make use of 'spot'? Never having used it, it's not something I was aware of.....


Mike. Wink

_________________
If I've helped you.....please say 'Thanks'!
MY PUPPY PACKAGES
--------------------------------------

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
jake29

Joined: 24 Jul 2015
Posts: 104

PostPosted: Fri 03 Nov 2017, 09:19    Post subject:  

Mike Walsh wrote:
Ah, I'm pleased to hear that. Does FatDog make use of 'spot'? Never having used it, it's not something I was aware of.....

Maybe someone else can correct me if I'm wrong, but /root/spot/ exists and appears to be used in FatDog. My understanding of this is limited.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
step

Joined: 04 May 2012
Posts: 950

PostPosted: Sun 05 Nov 2017, 04:18    Post subject:  

jake29 wrote:
Mike Walsh wrote:
Ah, I'm pleased to hear that. Does FatDog make use of 'spot'? Never having used it, it's not something I was aware of.....

Maybe someone else can correct me if I'm wrong, but /root/spot/ exists and appears to be used in FatDog. My understanding of this is limited.

Fatdog is true multi-user without sudo. The release system has one full user, root, and a "limited" user, spot, which is used to run Seamonkey by default. But you can run pretty much any process as spot by prefixing its command line with "run-as-spot". So I run Chromium-based browser Opera that way. It works well. For pepperflash support I have to specify the pepperflash.so path with --ppapi... and place the library file in spot's home folder with spot's ownership. Please note: don't hardwire /root/spot as spot's home. Instead read its location with ` ls -d ~spot` (bash) or `grep spot /etc/passwd|cut -d: -f6` (other shells).

_________________
Fatdog64-710|+Packages|Kodi|Findnrun|+forum|gtkmenuplus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 14 of 14 [205 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 12, 13, 14
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Additional Software (PETs, n' stuff) » Browsers and Internet
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.1432s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0177s) ][ GZIP on ]