Here's How to Enable Chrome "Strict Site Isolation" Experimental Security Mode

[LASER_oneXM]

Google Chrome 63, which shipped yesterday evening, arrived with a new experimental feature called Strict Site Isolation that according to Google engineers is an additional security layer on top of Chrome's built-in sandboxing technology.

While Google engineers have not explained the intricate differences between the default Chrome sandbox and Site Isolation, according to Google, the Strict Site Isolation feature puts "even stronger security boundaries between websites than Chrome’s existing sandboxing technology."

This is how Google describes the Strict Site Isolation feature in a support page:

Google’s site isolation feature improves security for Chrome browser users. When you enable site isolation, content for each open website in the Chrome browser is always rendered in a dedicated process, isolated from other sites. This creates an additional security boundary between websites.

The feature is not enabled for all users by default. The reason is that Google is still working on improving Site Isolation, and says that if users turn it on in Chrome 63, they "will increase memory usage by approximately 10–20%."

If this is not an issue for some of our readers, these are the two easiest ways to enable Site Isolation right now.

The Site Isolation feature is part of a larger set of features Google included in Chrome 63 specifically for its enterprise userbase. The other new enterprise-friendly Chrome features are:

◈ Domain admins can now whitelist or blacklist Chrome extensions based on the permissions they require. For example, a domain admin can issue a company-wide group policy to block all Chrome extensions that ask for the webcam permission during their installation and all of the company's Chrome browsers will refuse to install such extensions.
◈ Chrome 63 now supports the latest TLS 1.3 standard, which will be enabled for all outgoing connections.
◈ Chrome 63 supports the NTLMv2 authentication protocol.

 

[Syafiq]

Thanks, but i have already enabled it

 

[d0ts]

RAM usage really does noticeably increase yet I'm willing to for this enhancement.

 

[shmu26]

If you enabled site isolation, and now you can't open Gmail, just make a new shortcut or bookmark. That fixes it.

 

[Deleted member 65228]

If you enabled site isolation, and now you can't open Gmail, just make a new shortcut or bookmark. That fixes it.

Well that makes sense doesn't it

 

[shmu26]

Well that makes sense doesn't it

Sure does. You might even say it is obvious. But I still didn't figure it out until I saw it on a different forum. At first, I just said "Stupid Google," and disabled the flag.

 

[SHvFl]

I have it on for a while now. Every few months i go in flags and browse to see what they put there and if they have anything interesting. If i find something interesting i enable it and keep it on if it doesn't break something.

 

[shmu26]

I have it on for a while now. Every few months i go in flags and browse to see what they put there and if they have anything interesting. If i find something interesting i enable it and keep it on if it doesn't break something.

Besides site isolation, what other interesting and non-breaking things did you find in there?
I know a lot of people like to enable appcontainer, for instance.

 

[SHvFl]

Besides site isolation, what other interesting and non-breaking things did you find in there?
I know a lot of people like to enable appcontainer, for instance.

Security wise i only have appcontainer and site isolation. Rest is for networking and ease of use.

 

[Deleted member 65228]

Sure does. You might even say it is obvious. But I still didn't figure it out until I saw it on a different forum. At first, I just said "Stupid Google," and disabled the flag.

I don't understand why websites break but then bookmarking it will stop it. To me that makes zero sense. I assume you are being sarcastic but if you are dead serious then do let me know why this is

 

[shmu26]

I don't understand why websites break but then bookmarking it will stop it. To me that makes zero sense. I assume you are being sarcastic but if you are dead serious then do let me know why this is

I don't remember the explanation I saw online, but at the time it made sense to me.

 

[Overkill]

Is this for any Windows OS or just 10?

 

[AtlBo]

On memory usage, I can recommend an extension called The Great Suspender. This is one of my favorite extensions. It deactivates tabs that haven't been used within a user prescribed (settings) amount of time. You can also set pinned tabs or certain sites to always be available and then also for tabs to open automatically without a second click when a suspended site's tab is clicked.

With Google Strict Site Isolation enabled, maybe adding TGS could be a way to mitigate some of the memory issues. I don't have time to test this for now, but I already use The Great Suspender. I will probably wait for Google to improve this idea before trying the concept in Chrome...

 

[HarborFront]

I searched for it and it's not in my Chrome browser v63.0.3239.132. No Strict Site Isolation

 

[DeepWeb]

I searched for it and it's not in my Chrome browser v63.0.3239.132. No Strict Site Isolation

You can thank the great new Material design for that.... it makes everything sooo much better and easier to navigate, thank you Google....

#enable-site-per-process

 

[Deleted member 178]

I searched for it and it's not in my Chrome browser v63.0.3239.132. No Strict Site Isolation

paste this on tthe address bar

chrome://flags/#enable-site-per-process

 

[Faybert]

paste this on tthe address bar

chrome://flags/#enable-site-per-process

activated here in Opera to test, the most notable drawback is that enabling this feature can lead to increased memory and resource usage.

 

[Sunshine-boy]

Thanks to Windows_Security, I already enabled it.

 

[AtlBo]

Got around to enabling this setting. After a couple of hours of heavy use not immediately seeing the RAM usage dark side.