updated to manifest v3 a long time ago, so it looks like it's a chrome update bug. On Fri, Jul 4, 2025 at 4:25 PM Oliver Dunk wrote: > The only time this message is used is when we disable

>> Manifest (v3) includes: “storage”: { “managed_schema”: “schema.json” } >> >> schema.json at the package root: { “type”: “object”, “properties”: { “apiKey

extension using Manifest V3. >>> The crash happens immediately after the chrome.sidePanel.open call, and no >>> specific error message is logged before the

difference between Manifest V2 and Manifest V3 here so it does sound like something else is wrong. Without seeing a full example, it's hard to help. Would you be able to put together

>> Manifest V3 is used. >> - >> >> A Privacy Policy is provided. >> - >> >> Only required permissions (cookies, storage) are requested

policies in Manifest V3: https://developer.chrome.com/docs/webstore/program-policies/mv3-requirements/ We do allow for remote configuration, as long as the full set of behaviors

The extension's manifest version. >>>>>>>>>>> * The type of background context used (persistent page, event >>>>>>

upgraded to manifest v3, and part of >> that involved moving some calls that I had done on a background page to an >> offscreen page. >> >> Specifically, my

done in manifest.json if I remember >>> correctly, try googling. >>> On Saturday, March 22, 2025 at 7:55:35 PM UTC+3 Svyatoslav Alekseev >>> wrote:

keep a Manifest v2 version of our extension on the Chrome Web Store >>> so that those clients are currently installing it using Registry's >>> HKLM/SOFTWARE

> *manifest.json*{ >>> "name": "Audio Capture Test", >>> "description": "Records tab audio with transcription

Requirements for Manifest V3:* > > - *Violation:* > Including remotely hosted code in a Manifest V3 item. > - *Violating Content:* > - *Code snippet:* popup.js: gapiScript

Hello Cuyler, Good point! In that case, which React framework would be the best fit for a Chrome extension? On Monday, February 24, 2025 at 8:45:29 PM

design of Manifest V3 and would make the experiences > much more similar. > Oliver Dunk | DevRel, Chrome Extensions | https://developer.chrome.com/ | London, > GB > >

and since Manifest V2 will > soon be deprecated, I'll be using Manifest V3. However, I have some > specific requirements that I haven't been able to fully address yet

failing in manifest v3 when the anchorElement is having >> href="javascript:somefn()" >> >> Error - >> "Refused to run the JavaScript

extension uses Manifest V3, I cannot use remotely hosted code, > which would have made implementing feature flags easier. Given this > restriction: > > 1. *Is there a way

achievable in manifest v3 Yes. In fact, this is not possible in *both* Manifest V2 and Manifest V3. For using native proxy as you suggested, will it be like this ? - extension > redirects

is my manifest.json and the details of my extension, i can't seem to >> figure out why everything else on the manifest.json is applying but my >> permissions are not

removed for manifest V3 was done for years at this point, and will continue to not be supported. The pieces that you mentioned are supported a manifest v3, and will continue to be supported

you using Manifest V3? If so, the suggested approach would be to open an offscreen document and call the audio APIs from there: https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/reference

workarounds for v3 look a bit convoluted and bonkers, but I'll try them out in due course, and assuming they do the trick, all I have to do is wait for direct execution in mv3 in a couple

documentation for Manifest V3? https://firebase.google.com/docs/auth/web/chrome-extension In particular firebase/auth/web-extension is specifically designed to work

have a manifest v2 we need to update. >> >> We don't mind at all providing a valid, reachable and public phone number >> but we are completely stuck because there

API in Manifest V3, we heard > from many developers that they often need to inject a script based on a > user action. This was not easy to do with the existing API which required >

scripts in Manifest V2. Now, frames are matched with the `match_origin_as_fallback ` logic implemented in Manifest V3. This means both frames would be included by default. This follows

given us Manifest V3 ... https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/07/googles-plans-chrome-extensions-wont-really-help-security On Tuesday, January 14, 2025 at 10:04:08 AM

built using Manifest V3 as required. >>>> The only possible reason I can think of is that the extension icon >>>> doesn't match the icon at the top of the

/ /manifest.json page was accessible, but its DevTools Console was empty (it had no logs). When we ran await chrome.runtime.getContexts({}) in its console, it showed only one context

uses a manifest 2, and recently (it was >>>>>>>>> yesterday) I had to manually enable it since google chrome says " This >>>>>