Listen to this Post
In
Security Flaws in Popular Chrome Extensions
Cybersecurity researchers from Symantec’s Security Technology and Response team have revealed that several widely used Chrome extensions transmit sensitive information over unencrypted HTTP connections instead of secure HTTPS. This practice exposes users to the risk of data interception, especially on unsecured networks like public Wi-Fi, where attackers can perform adversary-in-the-middle (AiTM) attacks. Among the leaked data are browsing domains, machine identifiers, operating system details, usage analytics, and even uninstall events—all sent in plain text.
Notable extensions transmitting data insecurely include SEMRush Rank, PI Rank, Browsec VPN, MSN New Tab, MSN Homepage, and DualSafe Password Manager & Digital Vault. Although these extensions don’t appear to leak passwords, the use of unencrypted channels undermines trust, particularly in password managers where security is paramount.
Another alarming discovery is the presence of hard-coded API keys, secrets, and tokens embedded directly in the JavaScript code of many extensions. These credentials give attackers potential control over services, allowing them to send malicious requests, inflate developer costs, corrupt analytics, or even mimic cryptocurrency transactions. Extensions such as Online Security & Privacy, AVG Online Security, Speed Dial, SellerSprite, Equatio, Awesome Screen Recorder, Microsoft Editor, and Trust Wallet have all been found exposing various types of sensitive keys.
A particularly widespread vulnerability involves the InboxSDK library, used by over 90 extensions, which contains hard-coded credentials, amplifying the risk across multiple unrelated extensions.
Symantec strongly advises developers to avoid storing sensitive credentials on the client side, use HTTPS for all communications, and implement secure backend services to manage secrets. Users are urged to remove or disable risky extensions until these security issues are fixed, as the threat is tangible and ongoing. The presence of large user bases or recognizable brand names does not guarantee that extensions follow best security practices, emphasizing the need for increased scrutiny and vigilance.
What Undercode Say: Analyzing the Risks and Developer Responsibilities
This revelation shines a spotlight on a critical but often overlooked vulnerability in browser extension ecosystems: poor security hygiene by developers. Extensions, especially popular ones, handle a wealth of user data and, therefore, carry significant responsibility to protect that data. The fact that many extensions still transmit information over plain HTTP in 2025 indicates a troubling disregard for basic security protocols.
One of the most pressing concerns is the exposure of sensitive API keys and tokens in publicly accessible code. These secrets can become gateways for attackers to exploit backend services, driving up costs for developers or enabling malicious activities. For example, a leaked Azure speech recognition key could result in unexpectedly high charges, while an exposed AWS key could be used to upload or access unauthorized data.
From an analytic perspective, this situation underscores a persistent problem in software development: the tension between speed of deployment and security rigor. Many extensions seem to prioritize features or market presence over thorough security reviews. The use of third-party libraries, such as InboxSDK, without verifying their security posture further multiplies the attack surface.
Additionally, the
Moreover, there is a significant opportunity for browser vendors like Google to enforce stricter security requirements on extensions, such as mandatory HTTPS communication and automated scanning for exposed secrets before extensions are published or updated.
The findings also highlight the value of continuous monitoring and vulnerability assessment in the extension ecosystem. Security is not a one-time effort but a continuous process requiring updates, secret rotation, and swift patching of identified flaws.
Ultimately, for the ecosystem to mature, developers must embrace secure coding standards, including never hard-coding secrets in client-side code, using encrypted protocols for data transmission, and regularly auditing their extensions for security gaps. Failure to do so risks user trust, regulatory consequences, and potential financial damages.
Fact Checker Results ✅❌
✅ Several Chrome extensions were found sending sensitive data over unencrypted HTTP connections.
✅ Hard-coded API keys and secrets exposed in extensions pose serious security threats.
❌ The risk is not hypothetical—unsecured data can be intercepted or modified in real-time attacks on public networks.
Prediction 🔮
Given these findings, the Chrome Web Store and other browser marketplaces will likely tighten security standards, introducing mandatory encryption and more robust secret management policies for extensions. Users will become increasingly cautious, demanding transparency and privacy assurances. Developers who fail to comply may see reduced adoption or removal from app stores. Furthermore, automated tools for detecting exposed credentials in browser extensions will become standard in development pipelines, helping prevent similar breaches before they reach users. This growing focus on extension security could reshape how users interact with browser add-ons, favoring privacy-first options and raising the overall security baseline across the ecosystem.
References:
Reported By: thehackernews.com
Extra Source Hub:
https://www.pinterest.com
Wikipedia
Undercode AI
Image Source:
Unsplash
Undercode AI DI v2
