The relevant line of the Google script is:
(window,document,'script','//www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js','ga');
I am running this particular file locally (as in, I double-click "index.html" on Windows Explorer and it opens in Chrome.
After about a minute of trying to load this file it fails with net::ERR_FILE_NOT_FOUND reported in the Developer Console.
I understand why this is happening, it is trying to load this as a local file. If I do this it works just fine:
(window,document,'script','www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js','ga');
In other words, I eliminated the //. This would work just as well:
(window,document,'script','http://www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js','ga');
Is going explicitly doing it this way to only track real websites?
If so, how are you dealing with this issue for local development?
I do run a VM with Ubuntu server for local development of more elaborate sites. In this case I was working on a single file landing page that I knocked out quickly and wanted to just test just as easily but ran into the browser hanging waiting for analytics.js
Is it safe to remove the // or add http: in general terms. I don't generally like to modify Google code unless I fully understand why they are doing things in a specific way and what the consequences of my actions might be.
Instead of viewing the file locally, run it through a local webserver. Two easy options are
XAMPP: http://portableapps.com/apps/development/xampp
Uniform Server: http://www.uniformserver.com/
Both require no installation. If you have Visual Studio or WebMatrix, you can also run it through Cassini or IISExpress.
It can be that you are using a VPN(Virtual private network) which analytics blocks. Try loading https://www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js
If id does not work try disabling the VPN and try again.
Or as someone else mentioned it could be that your AdBlock is blocking it.
Related
Overview
I am trying to make a Chrome Extension that takes the currently open html page and all its dependencies (CSS, JS) and uploads it to a custom domain via FTP. I would then be able to open it on my phone to make sure the website looks good on a phone.
Basically, I am trying to replicate the VSCode extension Live Server's functionality, but with it uploading the file to a custom domain. I know you'd normally be able to access live server's locally hosted server from a phone, but my university's internet setup doesn't seem to allow for this, hence my desire for an extension like this.
All I know about my hosting service is that it uses cPanel and supports FTP, which I assume is all I need. I can set up new FTP connections and logins. All the FTP details in the code will be hardcoded, but drawn from a separate file and .gitignored so they aren't in my commit history, which I hope is enough.
What I've Tried & What I'm Stuck On
I have most of the chrome extension stuff figured out; The FTP transfer process is what's giving me issues.
I first tried using chrome-app-ftp, but quickly realized that was old and was running into issues, so I switched to jsftp.
I used browserify to fix the "require" issue, and that cleared up some stuff.
I'm currently stuck on the following bug:
Error: TypeError: createConnection is not a function
I've done my research, and I do not think the error is because of an issue in my code; I believe that it is just a limitation of the tools I am using. This seems to be an issue with front-end JS not supporting the "net" module, which brings me to my question.
My Question
How do I circumvent my lack of support for the "net" module in the front-end? Do I need to set up some sort of local back-end for this with node or something like that? I have basically zero experience with anything back-end, so I might need pointed towards what sort of back-end is best for this. I more just need to know which tech stack is best for doing this.
If additional information is necessary I'll be checking back frequently and happy to help. Thanks in advance.
Is there a way to identify and block JS files/events that are not part of your domain?
Like assume, if I'm writing a extension for chrome and I put following code in my JS
$('div').on('click', function(){ alert("yup"); });
is there a way for a website to handle this case?
Edit 1:
After discussion with #Clive, I realized that all extension/application should run in sandbox and should not be able to access events/elements outside the scope.
Case
A chrome extension have a keypress event on input[type=text] and input[type=password]. Now this extension runs in background, so there JS files are always available. Hence if you open facebook and login to your account, this extension will capture data and can send it to its server.
My Case
Two user was getting alert messages multiple times. Initially we thought its a part of our code and checked all JS files. But then realized, both user had same extension and so we diagnosed that extension's JS file and found alert in it. Now we were lucky, no damage was done, but it still posses a possible security threat.
Short answer: No.
Long answer:
Chrome extensions run their code in a separate space from your site's code, so they don't interact at all. The best you could do is prevent DOM edits. Luckily chrome extensions already run in a sandbox and have to explicitly ask for permissions for the domains that they inject code in and those domains are all listed when you install an extension. The only other way for extensions to interact with a page is through the activeTab permission which is a one time allowance on a specific user action. If you are using an extension that you think is malicious, you can always just read the code since JS is naturally open source. It really all boils down to a matter of trust. Installing something is explicitly trusting that thing to not mess up your stuff. This applies to all programs. If you don't trust an extension, then don't install it. A sandbox can only prevent so much while still letting extensions do something.
I found the some strange <script/> tags on a site:
<script src="chrome-extension://lifbcibllhkdhoafpjfnlhfpfgnpldfl/document_iterator.js"></script>
<script src="chrome-extension://lifbcibllhkdhoafpjfnlhfpfgnpldfl/find_proxy.js"></script>
...
I haven't been able to find much information on this, but I highly doubt this is actually related to Google Chrome since this site in particular is still using <table>s for layout, and the source in question was retrieved with curl not a graphical web browser.
So,
What on earth is this?
What is chrome-extension://
Why is it using lifbcibllhkdhoafpjfnlhfpfgnpldfl as a directory name
Why is it pretending to be valid URL to a javascript file?
Why would I need find_proxy or document_iterator
Solved. As far as I know...
chrixian was right, It seems that only on this and a few select other pages, someone had re-saved them from Chrome's source-view with the Skype extension installed.
Thanks everyone for all your help, +1's for all! enjoy!
That is actually Skype Click to Call chrome extension.
Manage and view it using this link
chrome://extensions/?id=lifbcibllhkdhoafpjfnlhfpfgnpldfl
If you are using cURL to get the page, you're getting the HTML as it exists on the server--so I think a safe assumption would be: the author of the page initially saved the page from Chrome, he had an extension installed that inserted these script tages and lastly he didn't remove the script tags for one reason or another before putting the page on the server.
This is added by chrome as the page loads, to inject the extension's Javascript code into the page, so it can access the HTML document.
The Skype extension causes it by inserting all kinds of junk in webpages that you visit.
Do you have the Skype browser extension installed for Chrome?
Just disable the extension.
Chrome, like Firefox, provides developers with an easy API to extend the functionality of the web browser without needing to actually download and build the browser to do so.
They also provide a robust delivery system. In Google's case, it's the Google Chrome Web Store.
Extensions are installed locally on your computer, and use long strings as directory names to reduce the risk of collisions with another extension. In other words, if you and I both named our extensions "mycoolextension", then there would be a problem if a person tried to install your extension and my extension. The long string helps prevent collisions such as this.
The chrome-extension:// protocol is used by the browser to make requests to these local resources. Chrome extensions are developed using HTML5, JavaScript, and CSS, along with an API exposed to allow the local JavaScript to perform actions it would not normally be able to do on the Internet.
When you see these in the Chrome developer tools, it's just the extension doing it's thing, whatever that may be.
If you're seeing these, then you likely installed some extensions from the Chrome Web Store. To view them, go to the Tools menu and select "Extensions". This will show you a list of all installed Chrome extensions and apps.
To learn more about extension development, see the Getting Started Tutorial.
Also, as someone else mentioned, you're using the Skype Call Extension. However, an app using that directory name doesn't appear in the first page of the search results. It might be worth doing some more research to make sure you got that extension from a legitimate source, whether that be Skype or the Chrome Web Store.
If you're seeing it in Chrome developer tools for every request you make, it means it has access to all your websites, which could be benign, like if they're just making phone numbers clickable, or it could be malicious, if it's scraping your bank account info and shipping it off to some third party server. :)
It's a Chrome extension, and chrome-extension:// is a URL for extensions to address their contents via Javascript.
lifbcibllhkdhoafpjfnlhfpfgnpldfl is the unique identifier for the extension. I can't find it with a search, but apparently it might be Skype.
It's not pretending... it is a valid URL. The Javascript file is located in the extension. If you were to look on your harddrive you'd probably find that very file in the extensions folder.
The functions its calling probably are some sort of detection used by the extension to see if it needs to enable itself.
See this for some additional information:
Checking if user has a certain extension installed
I need to build a small "monitoring" scraper for a 3rd party website (it's an external website that has stats about our visitors).
Unfortunately, this website is very hard to scrape through the normal "wget" mechanism, because it uses a ton of sophisticated JS, part of it generated by GWT. So my workaround was to create a GreaseMonkey script and then have this script call a PHP page that would log the scraped data. Then as soon as Firefox starts with this webpage-to-scrape, the script goes to work.
This works well, but now I am trying to make it more robust as far as monitoring tools go. I want it to run on the server using a cron job. As far as I understand such things, this requires a DISPLAY variable to be set and for an X session to exist (Firefox is refusing to run for me). Is there any nice way to allow it to run from the batchuser account as a cron job?
I've done something similar to get Selenium running headless on a server. I used Xvfb.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xvfb
This article has some tips for using Xvfb with Firefox:
http://semicomplete.com/blog/geekery/xvfb-firefox.html
The best way to do that is to build Firefox in the headless mode: http://hg.mozilla.org/incubator/offscreen
is there anyway to stop popping up the warning message in IE when trying to execute javascript?
I want some solution which does not need modifying the settings in the IE manually by the user.
Thanks,
If the message is only appearing for you when you run the scripts locally and not for your visitors when you upload your scripts to the server, I'd suggest one of three things:
Have a test server that you can use to run the things you are developing. This will avoid issues that might come up when you are running scripts locally. Apache or IIS should allow you to do this, although you will have to research how to get the server you choose to use working like your production environment (example: PHP).
If you want to continue to test your scripts locally, you can give your pages the Mark of the Web (<!-- saved from url=(0014)about:internet -->). This will force the page to run in the Internet Security Zone and avoid the message you see when you open an HTML file containing script locally.
If there is some reason you can't give the pages the MOTW, you can configure Internet Explorer to allow scripts to execute locally (note this is a bit dangerous since local files containing script can do something malicious). Go to Tools > Internet Options > Advanced tab > scroll to the Security section and check Allow active content to run in files on My Computer
This only occurs when you open local files. And no; there's no way to avoid this.
Or so I thought.. Untill Grant Wagner came by and gave his two cents :)