Advice Request Anyone using Chrome's flags to increase security and/or privacy

Please provide comments and solutions that are helpful to the author of this topic.

Windows_Security

Level 24
Thread author
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Mar 13, 2016
1,298
Are members using the beta features of Chrome browser by tweaking the about://flags settings?

Privacy enhancement
#disable-hyperlink-auditing
#reduced-referrer-granularity

Security improvements RC (which are available a very long time so they won't give problems)
#extension-content-verification (set to strict)
#enable-permissions-blacklist

Security improvements Beta (most are available since 2012, so on my PC stable for at least two years)
#enable-site-per-process (which I always use with the flag below to for performance and resource)
#enable-top-document-isolation (puts all isolated iframes together in stead of each in its own)
#disallow-doc-written-script-loads
#enable-framebusting-needs-sameorigin-or-usergesture
 

shmu26

Level 85
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Jul 3, 2015
8,153
Are members using the beta features of Chrome browser by tweaking the about://flags settings?

Privacy enhancement
#disable-hyperlink-auditing
#reduced-referrer-granularity

Security improvements RC (which are available a very long time so they won't give problems)
#extension-content-verification (set to strict)
#enable-permissions-blacklist

Security improvements Beta (most are available since 2012, so on my PC stable for at least two years)
#enable-site-per-process (which I always use with the flag below to for performance and resource)
#enable-top-document-isolation (puts all isolated iframes together in stead of each in its own)
#disallow-doc-written-script-loads
#enable-framebusting-needs-sameorigin-or-usergesture
Thanks.
Could you say a few words of comment and explanation about the various security flags you mentioned?
 

shmu26

Level 85
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Jul 3, 2015
8,153
The 'defeault" should automatically enable AppContainer for OS-ses supporting it (?)
Even on Windows 10 with updates, Google still does not enable it by default.
I assume because it can conflict with other things. Not only with AV, as already mentioned, but also with google products such as google docs offline.
 

Windows_Security

Level 24
Thread author
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Mar 13, 2016
1,298
Thanks.
Could you say a few words of comment and explanation about the various security flags you mentioned?

Very stable options
#extension-content-verification
This flag can be used to turn on verification that the contents of the files on disk for extensions from the webstore match what they're expected to be. The choice STRICT enforces a hash check. This option can not be turned off by software (to prevent tampering with by malware). Although not the same it can be compared with a signature check of normal programs (but it is a hash check for extensions in Chrome store).

#enable-permissions-blacklist
This requires you to have Chrome safe browsing feature enabled. URL-filtering is a numbers game, the more real users surfing or crawling the internet, the more URL's are collected. Chrome has because of ANdroid OS and its installed base of the browser the largest user base. When this setting is enabled visiting a website on the Google Chrome blacklist, will reduce permission in the browser (e.g. an ask or allow plug-ins to run code outside the sandbox, or use of camera will be turned into a no when enabling this setting).

Stable options
#enable-site-per-process
This security mode ensures that a website is rendered by a separate process. In this mode cross site iframes will be processes OOP (out of process) in it sown sandbox.These "strictly isolates" pages are never allowed to share a process with regular web pages, even when navigating in a single tab. This is generally acceptable from a compatibility perspective because no scripting is expected between normal pages and WebUI pages, and because these can never be loaded in subframes of unprivileged pages. With the current level of support for out-of-process iframes, Chrome can also keep web content out of privileged extension processes. There is a interesting read about this process (started in 2012) Site Isolation - The Chromium Projects.

#enable-top-document-isolation
When you allow the enable-site-per-process feature, the number of renderer processes will grow with the number of websites opened in your browser. When Chrome uses a lot of renderer process it will automatically start to re-use processes. This sort of defeats the purpose of enable-site-per-process. This feature (enable-top-document-isolation) puts cross-site iframes in ONE separate process from the top document. In this mode, iframes from different third-party sites will be allowed to share a process. Historically, third party content such as ads and analytics used document.write to load script resources. So by grouping them together in one separate process you gain performance and keep resources available for others (e.g. for enable-site-per-process).

Could impactwebsites
#disallow-doc-written-script-loads
This blocks loading or cross-origin, parser-blocking scripts inserted via document.write in the main document. It was intended to be automatically enable on slow networks (e.g. 2G). Historically, third party content such as ads and analytics used document.write to load script resources. Despite support for asynchronous loading, websites still keep using document.write. This harms performance (and potentially also security). Since it is used by ads and analytics, any block generated by this feature probably don't have a negative impact anyway (unless you like to be tracked and read ads). Edit: when you have a javascript pop-up blocker installed you don't need to enable this setting.

#enable-framebusting-needs-sameorigin-or-usergesture
Don't permit an iframe to navigate the top level browsing context unless they are same-origin or the iframe is processing a user gesture. This was implemented with Chrome 56 but pulled back with chrome 57 after reported breakage. It might impacts some user verification/payment checks when doing online shopping. I have enabled it on my Asus Transformer, but disabled it on my wife's laptop and my desktop. When I do online banking or book flights and hotels (on travel) with my Asus everything seems to run fine (I am recognised and are allowed to finalize payment).
 
Last edited:

Windows_Security

Level 24
Thread author
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Mar 13, 2016
1,298
Even on Windows 10 with updates, Google still does not enable it by default.
I assume because it can conflict with other things. Not only with AV, as already mentioned, but also with google products such as google docs offline.

I mean when the flag is set (kept) at default, it will be enabled automatically when your OS supports AppContainer, see picture

upload_2017-6-15_8-39-4.png
 

shmu26

Level 85
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Jul 3, 2015
8,153
I mean when the flag is set (kept) at default, it will be enabled automatically when your OS supports AppContainer, see picture

View attachment 156176
Very interesting! I didn't know that.
However, there still does seem to be a difference between default and enabled on Windows 10.
With appcontainer at enabled, I could not use google docs offline. At default, I could.
 

Windows_Security

Level 24
Thread author
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Mar 13, 2016
1,298
N.B. on my Asus I use Chromium (Woolyss) with only one Chrome user profile (because it only has 2GB ram). I use a personal filter list with most prevalent ad and tracker servers collected from several Alexa 500 categories. This personal list of just 2665 filters is 95% effective as the 75K default rules of uBlock:
a) when you live in the US or EU (no co.uk ;) ad and tracking servers included)
b) when a country specific Easylist exists (so you have to enable your country Easylist filter also)
c) when you enable Google safe browsing (is more effective than all community based malware lists combined)
 

Attachments

  • My-ublock-static-filters.txt
    48.5 KB · Views: 904
Last edited:

Windows_Security

Level 24
Thread author
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Mar 13, 2016
1,298
Very interesting! I didn't know that.
However, there still does seem to be a difference between default and enabled on Windows 10.
With appcontainer at enabled, I could not use google docs offline. At default, I could.

It applies a whitelist at default, I did not know that :)

You have found an interesting scoop!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

shmu26

Level 85
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Jul 3, 2015
8,153
Very stable options
#extension-content-verification
This flag can be used to turn on verification that the contents of the files on disk for extensions from the webstore match what they're expected to be. The choice STRICT enforces a hash check. This option can not be turned off by software (to prevent tampering with by malware). Although not the same it can be compared with a signature check of normal programs (but it is a hash check for extensions in Chrome store).

#enable-permissions-blacklist
This requires you to have Chrome safe browsing feature enabled. URL-filtering is a numbers game, the more real users surfing or crawling the internet, the more URL's are collected. Chrome has because of ANdroid OS and its installed base of the browser the largest user base. When this setting is enabled visiting a website on the Google Chrome blacklist, will reduce permission in the browser (e.g. an ask or allow plug-ins to run code outside the sandbox, or use of camera will be turned into a no when enabling this setting).

Stable options
#enable-site-per-process
This security mode ensures that a website is rendered by a separate process. In this mode cross site iframes will be processes OOP (out of process) in it sown sandbox.These "strictly isolates" pages are never allowed to share a process with regular web pages, even when navigating in a single tab. This is generally acceptable from a compatibility perspective because no scripting is expected between normal pages and WebUI pages, and because these can never be loaded in subframes of unprivileged pages. With the current level of support for out-of-process iframes, Chrome can also keep web content out of privileged extension processes. There is a interesting read about this process (started in 2012) Site Isolation - The Chromium Projects.

#enable-top-document-isolation
When you allow the enable-site-per-process feature, the number of renderer processes will grow with the number of websites opened in your browser. When Chrome uses a lot of renderer process it will automatically start to re-use processes. This sort of defeats the purpose of enable-site-per-process. This feature (enable-top-document-isolation) puts cross-site iframes in ONE separate process from the top document. In this mode, iframes from different third-party sites will be allowed to share a process. Historically, third party content such as ads and analytics used document.write to load script resources. So by grouping them together in one separate process you gain performance and keep resources available for others (e.g. for enable-site-per-process).

Could impactwebsites
#disallow-doc-written-script-loads
This blocks loading or cross-origin, parser-blocking scripts inserted via document.write in the main document. It was intended to be automatically enable on slow networks (e.g. 2G). Historically, third party content such as ads and analytics used document.write to load script resources. Despite support for asynchronous loading, websites still keep using document.write. This harms performance (and potentially also security). Since it is used by ads and analytics, any block generated by this feature probably don't have a negative impact anyway (unless you like to be tracked and read ads), therefore I have it enabled on all PC's.

#enable-framebusting-needs-sameorigin-or-usergesture
Don't permit an iframe to navigate the top level browsing context unless they are same-origin or the iframe is processing a user gesture. This was implemented with Chrome 56 but pulled back with chrome 57 after reported breakage. It might impacts some user verification/payment checks when doing online shopping. I have enabled it on my Asus Transformer, but disabled it on my wife's laptop and my desktop. When I do online banking or book flights and hotels (on travel) with my Asus everything seems to run fine (I am recognised and are allowed to finalize payment).
Thanks for the detailed explanations. I will have to read this carefully...
 

Windows_Security

Level 24
Thread author
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Mar 13, 2016
1,298
@mekelek

Start with the very stable options, try them for some time (they should not give any problems), then after some time move to the stable.

When you use a javascript blocker, you don't need to #disallow-doc-written-script-loads. Most websites using this "old" doc-.write technique use it to throw pop-ups in your face before opening the website you clicked. With disallow-doc-written-script-loads Chrome closes without prompt, so a javascript pop-up blocker does the job more gracefully (informing you about the pop-up attempt launched by such a document write script).

When you are afraid of frame-busting or clickjacking practices (explanation) I would rather opt for a secure VPN connect service than using #enable-framebusting-needs-sameorigin-or-usergesture
 
Last edited:

mekelek

Level 28
Verified
Well-known
Feb 24, 2017
1,661
@mekelek

Start with the very stable options, try them for some time (they should not give any problems), then after some time move to the stable.

When you use a javascript blocker, you don't need to #disallow-doc-written-script-loads. Most websites using this "old" doc-.write technique use it to throw pop-ups in your face before opening the website you clicked. With disallow-doc-written-script-loads Chrome closes without prompt, so a javascript pop-up blocker does the job more gracefully (informing you about the pop-up attempt launched by such a document write script).

When you are afraid of frame-busting or clickjacking practices (explanation) I would rather opt for a secure VPN connect service than using #enable-framebusting-needs-sameorigin-or-usergesture
I had most of these options on "Default" option that leaves them enabled. No issues so far.
 

About us

  • MalwareTips is a community-driven platform providing the latest information and resources on malware and cyber threats. Our team of experienced professionals and passionate volunteers work to keep the internet safe and secure. We provide accurate, up-to-date information and strive to build a strong and supportive community dedicated to cybersecurity.

User Menu

Follow us

Follow us on Facebook or Twitter to know first about the latest cybersecurity incidents and malware threats.

Top