MV3 conversion

[Muhammad Najam Sheraz]

I am converting my MV2 extension into MV3 extension it is a security providing extension that is based on a big feed of URLs,regex and domains While converting I am facing some big issues.I hope you can help me with these

1)During the use of Regex filter I am having some trouble,I usually get an error that my regex is too complex for the regexfilter, can you kindly inform me about the standards we are following here in regex filter.

2)The well known argument about limit of Guaranteed static and dynamic rules.The thing with my extension is I have a really big feed of malicious Urls and regex. To keep users safe I cannot miss a single one as my extension is used in the whole world.The thing is I was using web request API until now to block such malicious sites. With the deprecation of WebRequest API and the rule limit in Declarative net Request I can't figure a possible change.Kindly suggest me a way to it.

3)As I was using WebRequest API until now.Is there any way i can keep using it in MV3 to keep blocking such malicious sites?

4)As the structure of my extension is a bit complex we are using many types of feeds and classes to keep our user safe.I am using one option of rule filter in which i do not block or redirect when a rule is matched. Is there any option in which i just use a listener when a specific rule is matched and add a notify user instead of redirecting it or blocking it?

waiting for your reply Eagerly.

[wOxxOm]

ManifestV3 has broken all advanced security extensions like yours, uBlock Origin being the most famous one, probably. There is no solution currently and I doubt there will be a solution before MV2 is removed from Chrome, given the effectively total lack of meaningful development of declarativeNetRequest API over the last 6 months after its main developer has left the team.

You should report your findings as separate bugs on https://crbug.com as someone else in the team may pick up the development. Make sure to attach a minimal extension that demonstrates each problem.

[Simeon Vincent]

Muhammad, have you consideterd providing this functionality using a proxy server rather than a Chrome extension?

Simeon - @dotproto

Chrome Extensions DevRel

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium Extensions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extens...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/fb23b432-5cc3-4196-a6f0-f958c4406f70n%40chromium.org.

[Cuyler Stuwe]

“Have you tried just not developing browser extensions?” 😂

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/CAFY0HLMhXjewXWVyMjZkjHQy24JCWOTy0Y3cDdK9TCTXBNmbDQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Cuyler Stuwe]

… or maybe making a Firefox extension that boldly advertises that the reason it’s not available in Chrome is that Firefox is a more capable browser. 🤔

[Deco]

Perhaps this thread list by gorhill will be of use to you for migrating to version 3.0: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338#issuecomment-1079126636

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium Extensions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extens...@chromium.org.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/5aee0ec7-2ee8-4e8c-930f-dc9c1671c82fn%40chromium.org.

[Darbid]

My fav quote from the MV3 bug tracker..

“Our goal is not to break extensions. We are working with extension developers to strive to keep this breakage to a minimum, while still advancing the platform to enhance security, privacy, and performance for all users”

That statement is ageing well.

[hrg...@gmail.com]

That statement is ageing well.

On the contrary. That statement is completely rotten by now.

MV3 is a massive breakage to the point that ALL extensions require significant modifications in order to work under MV3. But worse, a significant percentage of them require major re-engineering.

It's also clear by now, that the Extensions Team has been lying all along about the true reason for this massive breakage.

What they are actually going after is an extensions platform that can work under Android, which forces lifetime constraints on all processes. This is why they removed the background page; they cannot guarantee under Android that the background page is persistent.

So, their solution is simple, they want to force everybody to adopt the lifetime constraints of Android, even for extensions that don't make sense to be used in a mobile OS.

[Cuyler Stuwe]

Where have I seen “forcing desktop tools to awkwardly adopt a mobile paradigm” before?

Oh yeah… Windows 8. 😅

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium Extensions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extens...@chromium.org.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/9f995eff-7c55-4984-bca4-7fa2e2e4e5f5n%40chromium.org.