Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. So the Claude extension allows any other extension to inject JavaScript into claude.ai and run it?

So the Claude extension allows any other extension to inject JavaScript into claude.ai and run it?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
19 Posts 15 Posters 29 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • mttaggart@infosec.exchangeM mttaggart@infosec.exchange

    So the Claude extension allows any other extension to inject JavaScript into claude.ai and run it? Cool cool cool.

    Yeah, don't let this one in.

    Link Preview Image
    ClaudeBleed: A Flaw In Claude's Browser Extension Allows Any Extension to Hijack It - LayerX

    Executive Summary LayerX security researchers have discovered a flaw with Claude’s Chrome extension (“Claude in Chrome”) that allows any extension, even one with no special permissions at all, to effectively hijack Claude’s extension by injecting it with malicious instructions, extract any information that the attacker desires, and get Claude to perform active agentic actions on […]

    favicon

    LayerX (layerxsecurity.com)

    float13@masto.hackers.townF This user is from outside of this forum
    float13@masto.hackers.townF This user is from outside of this forum
    float13@masto.hackers.town
    wrote last edited by
    #9

    @mttaggart

    2001: I'm afraid I can't do that...

    2026: I'm afraid I *can* do that!

    "AI"... Service with a smile!

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • mttaggart@infosec.exchangeM mttaggart@infosec.exchange

      So the Claude extension allows any other extension to inject JavaScript into claude.ai and run it? Cool cool cool.

      Yeah, don't let this one in.

      Link Preview Image
      ClaudeBleed: A Flaw In Claude's Browser Extension Allows Any Extension to Hijack It - LayerX

      Executive Summary LayerX security researchers have discovered a flaw with Claude’s Chrome extension (“Claude in Chrome”) that allows any extension, even one with no special permissions at all, to effectively hijack Claude’s extension by injecting it with malicious instructions, extract any information that the attacker desires, and get Claude to perform active agentic actions on […]

      favicon

      LayerX (layerxsecurity.com)

      jrcruciani@masto.impermanente.esJ This user is from outside of this forum
      jrcruciani@masto.impermanente.esJ This user is from outside of this forum
      jrcruciani@masto.impermanente.es
      wrote last edited by
      #10

      @mttaggart @briankrebs Mythos really missed this one, eh?

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • mttaggart@infosec.exchangeM mttaggart@infosec.exchange

        So the Claude extension allows any other extension to inject JavaScript into claude.ai and run it? Cool cool cool.

        Yeah, don't let this one in.

        Link Preview Image
        ClaudeBleed: A Flaw In Claude's Browser Extension Allows Any Extension to Hijack It - LayerX

        Executive Summary LayerX security researchers have discovered a flaw with Claude’s Chrome extension (“Claude in Chrome”) that allows any extension, even one with no special permissions at all, to effectively hijack Claude’s extension by injecting it with malicious instructions, extract any information that the attacker desires, and get Claude to perform active agentic actions on […]

        favicon

        LayerX (layerxsecurity.com)

        titusdegroan@hachyderm.ioT This user is from outside of this forum
        titusdegroan@hachyderm.ioT This user is from outside of this forum
        titusdegroan@hachyderm.io
        wrote last edited by
        #11

        @mttaggart
        this calls for the claude emoji: 🤡

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • mttaggart@infosec.exchangeM mttaggart@infosec.exchange

          So the Claude extension allows any other extension to inject JavaScript into claude.ai and run it? Cool cool cool.

          Yeah, don't let this one in.

          Link Preview Image
          ClaudeBleed: A Flaw In Claude's Browser Extension Allows Any Extension to Hijack It - LayerX

          Executive Summary LayerX security researchers have discovered a flaw with Claude’s Chrome extension (“Claude in Chrome”) that allows any extension, even one with no special permissions at all, to effectively hijack Claude’s extension by injecting it with malicious instructions, extract any information that the attacker desires, and get Claude to perform active agentic actions on […]

          favicon

          LayerX (layerxsecurity.com)

          landelare@mastodon.gamedev.placeL This user is from outside of this forum
          landelare@mastodon.gamedev.placeL This user is from outside of this forum
          landelare@mastodon.gamedev.place
          wrote last edited by
          #12

          @mttaggart An "AI tool" is vibe coded insecure slop? Who would've thunk™

          (btw #opencode is insecure crap, too, yet it has a scary amount of users)

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • mttaggart@infosec.exchangeM mttaggart@infosec.exchange

            So the Claude extension allows any other extension to inject JavaScript into claude.ai and run it? Cool cool cool.

            Yeah, don't let this one in.

            Link Preview Image
            ClaudeBleed: A Flaw In Claude's Browser Extension Allows Any Extension to Hijack It - LayerX

            Executive Summary LayerX security researchers have discovered a flaw with Claude’s Chrome extension (“Claude in Chrome”) that allows any extension, even one with no special permissions at all, to effectively hijack Claude’s extension by injecting it with malicious instructions, extract any information that the attacker desires, and get Claude to perform active agentic actions on […]

            favicon

            LayerX (layerxsecurity.com)

            alexmorgannn@mastodon.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
            alexmorgannn@mastodon.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
            alexmorgannn@mastodon.social
            wrote last edited by
            #13

            @mttaggart yikes, extension permissions are such a mess. the name ClaudeBleed is dramatic but the issue is real

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • mttaggart@infosec.exchangeM mttaggart@infosec.exchange

              So the Claude extension allows any other extension to inject JavaScript into claude.ai and run it? Cool cool cool.

              Yeah, don't let this one in.

              Link Preview Image
              ClaudeBleed: A Flaw In Claude's Browser Extension Allows Any Extension to Hijack It - LayerX

              Executive Summary LayerX security researchers have discovered a flaw with Claude’s Chrome extension (“Claude in Chrome”) that allows any extension, even one with no special permissions at all, to effectively hijack Claude’s extension by injecting it with malicious instructions, extract any information that the attacker desires, and get Claude to perform active agentic actions on […]

              favicon

              LayerX (layerxsecurity.com)

              chillybot@infosec.exchangeC This user is from outside of this forum
              chillybot@infosec.exchangeC This user is from outside of this forum
              chillybot@infosec.exchange
              wrote last edited by
              #14

              @mttaggart
              They can't have vulnerabilities they have mYtHoS

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • evacide@hachyderm.ioE evacide@hachyderm.io shared this topic
                R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
              • mttaggart@infosec.exchangeM mttaggart@infosec.exchange

                So the Claude extension allows any other extension to inject JavaScript into claude.ai and run it? Cool cool cool.

                Yeah, don't let this one in.

                Link Preview Image
                ClaudeBleed: A Flaw In Claude's Browser Extension Allows Any Extension to Hijack It - LayerX

                Executive Summary LayerX security researchers have discovered a flaw with Claude’s Chrome extension (“Claude in Chrome”) that allows any extension, even one with no special permissions at all, to effectively hijack Claude’s extension by injecting it with malicious instructions, extract any information that the attacker desires, and get Claude to perform active agentic actions on […]

                favicon

                LayerX (layerxsecurity.com)

                hweissi@infosec.exchangeH This user is from outside of this forum
                hweissi@infosec.exchangeH This user is from outside of this forum
                hweissi@infosec.exchange
                wrote last edited by
                #15

                @mttaggart Wait, so any extension with zero permission can execute XSS code on any origin? Injecting prompts to claude is the least of my worries then. With that, can't the same extension just steal your github credentials?

                hweissi@infosec.exchangeH 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • hweissi@infosec.exchangeH hweissi@infosec.exchange

                  @mttaggart Wait, so any extension with zero permission can execute XSS code on any origin? Injecting prompts to claude is the least of my worries then. With that, can't the same extension just steal your github credentials?

                  hweissi@infosec.exchangeH This user is from outside of this forum
                  hweissi@infosec.exchangeH This user is from outside of this forum
                  hweissi@infosec.exchange
                  wrote last edited by
                  #16

                  @mttaggart I looked a bit into it - apparently, Chrome does not require specific permissions beyond agreeing to install the extension, to inject content into the MAIN context of a page.
                  So, it looks like all of the demonstrated things (stealing emails, exfiltrating repos, etc.) could be done with just a malicious extension, completely skipping the claude step.
                  The only benefit it gives the attacker is that they can just tell claude what to do for them, instead of having to write (or vibecode) an actual exploit script.

                  So, for the demonstrated exploits, the claude extension doesn't really seem to add any new capabilities beyond what an installed extension can do anyways.

                  mttaggart@infosec.exchangeM 2 Replies Last reply
                  0
                  • hweissi@infosec.exchangeH hweissi@infosec.exchange

                    @mttaggart I looked a bit into it - apparently, Chrome does not require specific permissions beyond agreeing to install the extension, to inject content into the MAIN context of a page.
                    So, it looks like all of the demonstrated things (stealing emails, exfiltrating repos, etc.) could be done with just a malicious extension, completely skipping the claude step.
                    The only benefit it gives the attacker is that they can just tell claude what to do for them, instead of having to write (or vibecode) an actual exploit script.

                    So, for the demonstrated exploits, the claude extension doesn't really seem to add any new capabilities beyond what an installed extension can do anyways.

                    mttaggart@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                    mttaggart@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                    mttaggart@infosec.exchange
                    wrote last edited by mttaggart@infosec.exchange
                    #17
                    This post is deleted!
                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • hweissi@infosec.exchangeH hweissi@infosec.exchange

                      @mttaggart I looked a bit into it - apparently, Chrome does not require specific permissions beyond agreeing to install the extension, to inject content into the MAIN context of a page.
                      So, it looks like all of the demonstrated things (stealing emails, exfiltrating repos, etc.) could be done with just a malicious extension, completely skipping the claude step.
                      The only benefit it gives the attacker is that they can just tell claude what to do for them, instead of having to write (or vibecode) an actual exploit script.

                      So, for the demonstrated exploits, the claude extension doesn't really seem to add any new capabilities beyond what an installed extension can do anyways.

                      mttaggart@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                      mttaggart@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                      mttaggart@infosec.exchange
                      wrote last edited by
                      #18

                      @hweissi The issue here is the security boundary of externally_connected being broken because of the nature of the extension.

                      Any extension can request the scripting permission to inject JavaScript; that is true. Extensions are a huge security issue, but that's not the full story here.

                      When an extension does so on claude.ai, the Claude extension's externally_connectable manifest values allow that malicious script to send messages to the Claude extension itself, without explicitly requesting the runtime permission usually required for message sending. As a result, the injected code can't just watch the DOM—which again, yes, is a thing all extensions can do—, it can send messages to Claude via the extension, gaining access to Claude itself and the data stored therein.

                      Interestingly, it would seem the "fix" from Anthropic to add additional approvals for certain actions is also bypassable.

                      hweissi@infosec.exchangeH 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • mttaggart@infosec.exchangeM mttaggart@infosec.exchange

                        @hweissi The issue here is the security boundary of externally_connected being broken because of the nature of the extension.

                        Any extension can request the scripting permission to inject JavaScript; that is true. Extensions are a huge security issue, but that's not the full story here.

                        When an extension does so on claude.ai, the Claude extension's externally_connectable manifest values allow that malicious script to send messages to the Claude extension itself, without explicitly requesting the runtime permission usually required for message sending. As a result, the injected code can't just watch the DOM—which again, yes, is a thing all extensions can do—, it can send messages to Claude via the extension, gaining access to Claude itself and the data stored therein.

                        Interestingly, it would seem the "fix" from Anthropic to add additional approvals for certain actions is also bypassable.

                        hweissi@infosec.exchangeH This user is from outside of this forum
                        hweissi@infosec.exchangeH This user is from outside of this forum
                        hweissi@infosec.exchange
                        wrote last edited by
                        #19

                        @mttaggart So does that mean you can essentially get local code execution by communicating with a locally-running claude instance? That would be a bigger issue.

                        If it's only Claude in the browser, performing clicks for you - i don't think there's a lot of extra capabilities you get, compared to what you have already when you get someone to install the extension.
                        After all, why communicate with a different browser extension, when you already have a browser extension running?

                        However, still not great sandboxing by anthropic obviously.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        Reply
                        • Reply as topic
                        Log in to reply
                        • Oldest to Newest
                        • Newest to Oldest
                        • Most Votes


                        • Login

                        • Login or register to search.
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        0
                        • Categories
                        • Recent
                        • Tags
                        • Popular
                        • World
                        • Users
                        • Groups