Extension re-uploaded during appeal period

[Marius Margulus]

Morning,

We filed an appeal last week regarding the rejection of our extension (Purple Nickel). As part of the remediation, we added a privacy policy to the landing page we redirect users to this page is maintained in a separate repository. After making that change, we re-uploaded the extension, but it was rejected again.

It’s possible this happened because:

1. Once the privacy policy was added to the marketing site (in a different repo), re-uploading the extension didn’t result in any externally visible change; or

2. We may have re-uploaded the extension before the appeal review period had fully concluded?

Importantly, this is a privacy-centric application and we don't collect or store any user information. For historical context, we previously redirected users to a simple connection page (unlike the fully-featured landing page in this version) — which didn't include a privacy policy. In the uploaded version, we redirect users to a landing page with a privacy policy link at the bottom, so this change does actually better aligns with Chrome's privacy policy requirements. 

Thanks a lot, any information would be helpful. 

ID: lkpmkhpnhknhmibgnmmhdhgdilepfghe

[Patrick Kettner]

Hi Marius!

Having it on a different site, or only accessible through redirect(s) would be an issue, yes.

--
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 visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/979d7abe-4085-4203-8a13-0009be2e4005n%40chromium.org.

best

Patrick Kettner |     Chrome Extensions |       developer.chrome.com   |        New York   

[Marius Margulus]

Must have missed this patrick! 

Here's the landing page https://praxwallet.com/welcome that links to the privacy policy at the bottom https://praxwallet.com/privacy-policy/. This is historically how we've done it and haven't had any issues thus far. We filed an appeal, but are still waiting to hear back for over two weeks. Anything else we can do, some more help would be greatly appreciated! 

[Marius Margulus]

I'm wondering if we should maybe re-submit the extension with a bumped version to restart the process? 

[Patrick Kettner]

Do you happen to have the case number from when it was filed?

On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 5:45 PM Jorge Leandro <jorgefreita...@gmail.com> wrote:

• Marius Margulus enviou um email sobre o reenvio de uma extensão (Purple Nickel) após um apelo, mencionando que foi adicionada uma política de privacidade ao site https://praxwallet.com/welcome, que liga para https://praxwallet.com/privacy-policy/.
• Patrick Kettner respondeu que ter a política de privacidade em um site diferente ou acessível apenas por redirecionamentos seria um problema.
• Marius Margulus perguntou se devia reenviar a extensão com uma versão atualizada para reiniciar o processo.

Honestamente não faço a menor ideia do que se trata poderiam ser mais claros para eu ajudar ??

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/0722eba2-27ce-4ce5-9b1c-5aea311e74b9n%40chromium.org.

[Marius Margulus]

That's the thing, I didn't even receive an ID for the appeal request I filed, is that normal? Can an appeal be internally looked up by it's associated extension ID, lkpmkhpnhknhmibgnmmhdhgdilepfghe, in this case?

[Patrick Kettner]

It looks like that was case 2-3577000038726, which was opened under this account. You were sent an email from chromewebstor...@google.com with the subject line "[2-3577000038726] Your Chrome Web Store Support ticket has been created" on Wednesday, June 11 at 9:07 AM. 

Like the last one you opened, it was closed out because it was opened on this email account, rather than the developer email account associated with your item. You must be logged into and active (i.e. the profile photo on the upper right corner of Google pages) to the account that owns the extension item in order to submit any appeal for it.

patrick

best

Patrick Kettner |     Chrome Extensions |       developer.chrome.com   |        New York    Kettner |     Chrome Extensions |       developer.chrome.com   |        New York   

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium Extensions" group.

[Marius Margulus]

Rookie mistake! I will file a clean appeal that acknowledges the rejections and that the prior appeal was filed from the wrong account. Thanks for your time investigating Patrick!

[Marius Margulus]

Just to clarify patrick, the extension shouldn't be resubmitted during the appeal process, right?

[Patrick Kettner]

Each upload to the store is given a unique revision number in our system. So the first upload is revision 1, the second revision 2, etc. A rejection is associated with a revision. So you would be appealing a specific revision's rejection. If you upload a new thing to review, the appeal is invalidated since it no longer is relevant.

This is also true for each extension. If you have two separate listings, it would require two separate appeals. 

On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 12:51 AM Marius Margulus <margul...@gmail.com> wrote:

One last thing, if we have distinct production and beta extensions, and both were rejected for the same privacy violation, should the appeals be filed separately for each? Thanks!

best

best

Patrick Kettner |     Chrome Extensions |       developer.chrome.com   |        New York    Kettner |     Chrome Extensions |       developer.chrome.com   |        New York    Kettner |     Chrome Extensions |       developer.chrome.com   |        New York