possible bug with web clipper permission options in google chrome

[troggy 2]

Chrome version Version 83.0.4103.61 (Official Build) (64-bit) on debian buster 

Google chrome provides extension permission control so the web clipper either runs all the time on all sites, or only when clicked, or on selected domains.

Clipper works when it has permission to all sites, but if I choose "only when clicked", it doesn't work and plugin options become unavailable. I do get a notice that a page refresh is required for it to run, but it then still doesn't work.

[gazumped 11,661]

Hi. I understood all those words,  but not necessarily the order in which they were written...  Clipper is meant to be available on all websites,  to copy some or all of the content in various formats.  When you say "runs all the time on all sites" what exactly are you seeing???

[troggy 2]

Sorry if my original post was not clear enough. Let me try again. When I right click on the clipper icon in Google chrome, a context menu opens up. I then select the option that says "this can read and change site data" and three more options appear:

• "When you click the extension"
• on the current domain
• "on all sites"

So while clipper is designed to run on all sites, google chrome can restrict it so it only runs in a narrower range of pages. This is presumably intended to protect the user's privacy by giving control over when an app (like clipper) can 'see' the page content and when it can't . I have selected the first option "when you click the extension".

With that setting chosen I expect to then be able to use the clipper icon to clip a selected page. In this case when I click the clipper icon I get prompted to reload the page. this makes sense since the clipper hasn't been able to see the page so far. What should happen I think, is that when the page is reloaded Chrome should give clipper access to it. But nothing useful happens after I reload. If I click the clipper icon after the reload, the same instruction to reload the page appears once more, and so on.

If I set the third option instead "on all sites", then clipper works as it should, but that way I have given clipper permission to access all pages I visit, even when I have no intention of clipping those pages.

In short, the privacy option that Google have provided is interfering with how clipper developers expect it to work, with the result that users can set options that make clipper appear broken. I'm guessing that probably clipper was designed before Google provided this new privacy option. Now that the privacy option is there, I would think clipper could be modified to work with his new feature. My bug report is intended to make developers aware that there is an issue. Obviously it is up to the developers whether they want to accommodate it, but I think they ought to care to do so. It doesn't look good on evernote that they aren't keeping an eye on things and testing in the developing real world environment.

 

[gazumped 11,661]

Ah.  A great light dawns...  Thank you for the extra description!  (And apologies for my lack of comprehension) I agree - let's leave it to the devs to work out how to deal with this.  🙂

[evernox 0]

+1 to what the OP said, I also noticed this a few months ago, nothing has been resolved in the meantime. Really hope it will be

 

UPDATE: this is the error in the extension log

ERR: Channel: Message 'tabClipper.checkBackgroundStatus' failed with error:
Error: Tab must be specified
Error: Tab must be specified
    at Extension._tabClipper (chrome-extension://pioclpoplcdbaefihamjohnefbikjilc/commons.js:52:67037)
    at tabClipper (chrome-extension://pioclpoplcdbaefihamjohnefbikjilc/commons.js:52:70919)
    at Channel._handleDispatchRequest (chrome-extension://pioclpoplcdbaefihamjohnefbikjilc/commons.js:32:88258)
    at Channel._handleMessage (chrome-extension://pioclpoplcdbaefihamjohnefbikjilc/commons.js:32:86795)
    at _listener (chrome-extension://pioclpoplcdbaefihamjohnefbikjilc/commons.js:32:86660)

 

[gazumped 11,661]

I've been using Vivaldi and Brave browsers,  which are both Chrome clones,  but haven't noticed any issues...

[dobeerman 0]

2021\3\7 11:18:10 ERR Channel: Message 'tabClipper.checkBackgroundStatus' failed with error: 
Error: Tab must be specified  
Error: Tab must be specified
    at Extension._tabClipper (chrome-extension://pioclpoplcdbaefihamjohnefbikjilc/commons.js:56:67930)
    at tabClipper (chrome-extension://pioclpoplcdbaefihamjohnefbikjilc/commons.js:56:71812)
    at Channel._handleDispatchRequest (chrome-extension://pioclpoplcdbaefihamjohnefbikjilc/commons.js:32:88789)
    at Channel._handleMessage (chrome-extension://pioclpoplcdbaefihamjohnefbikjilc/commons.js:32:87326)
    at _listener (chrome-extension://pioclpoplcdbaefihamjohnefbikjilc/commons.js:32:87191)

Hey guys, the error still persists. Any updates?

• Ubuntu
• i3wm
• Chrome Version 88.0.4324.150 (Official Build) (64-bit)

[gazumped 11,661]

45 minutes ago, dobeerman said:

Hey guys, the error still persists. Any updates?

Still using Chrome here [Version 88.8.43.7641 (Official Build) (64-bit)] and no issues on either Windows or Linux Mint (Deb)  🤔

[troggy 2]

Clipper is still behaving badly here [Version 89.0.4389.114 (Official Build) (64-bit) on Debian 10] - I just tested it and it made the browser start to flash like mad. No obvious way  to stop this flashing, I had to close the browser and restart it, then turn off the option again. In case it helps other users, my temporary work around is to allow the clipper full access but then not allow it in incognito mode: and remember to use incognito for things like bank websites so anyone exploiting clipper can't spy if they try.

[bwydoogh 71]

On 4/10/2021 at 2:20 PM, troggy said:

I just tested it and it made the browser start to flash like mad

Same, especially true on google search: search something, go to result, swipe back (macOS) -> font "flash".

Disabled :/.

[nigebj 2]

Evernote - we pay for this product (at least a lot of us do). The clipper requiring access to all sites is unacceptable in today's privacy/security conscious world, so Google introduced a security model to alleviate those kind of concerns - you guys need to step up and make this work.

Without clipper, Evernote is just a place I can cut-and-paste stuff too - there's a lot of choices for that, many free.

Can we at least get a response after a year?!

[gazumped 11,661]

2 hours ago, nigebj said:

Can we at least get a response after a year?!

Hi.  This is a public (mainly) user-supported forum.  You'll get a direct response if you report your issue to Support.  https://help.evernote.com/hc/requests/new

[PinkElephant 8,094]

Clipper clips when YOU tell it to clip. I really don’t see a reason to restrict it to only a selection of sites, because it is usually only sitting around in the browser, waiting to be activated by yourself. It is not snooping on pages you visit, it does not send information to remote control servers in the background, it does not filter your web traffic - it only does clip when told to do so. And it only can send content to your account when you authorized it to do so, an access you can revoke at any time. Where is your privacy concern ?

It does not enhance our privacy to run clipper like this:

“Hey clipper, clip that page for me !

Yes ? No ! Ohhhhhhh …“

[troggy 2]

I feel pinkelephant's comment is a bit off topic. It's more about how one approaches security, whereas this thread is simply about clipper not working with security features in the browser. Some users might not care for the browser feature, but others who do find the way clipper doesn't play well with it a problem.

[PinkElephant 8,094]

Clipper is working securely and with full privacy. It needs no watchdog because it only executes his job once the user decides to activate it. And it does not send remote messages to other services, it only communicates with the EN account to which it is connected. Don’t clip = nothing happens.

Everything is user controlled. Everything can be blocked by the user as well, for example by setting security measures very strict in the browser, or by a firewall.

Personally I don’t care, if people believe in setting security very tight they should know how to make exceptions work (usually by whitelisting). If they don’t, they probably don’t understand what they are doing in the first place. 

[troggy 2]

Like I said, please stay on topic please

[gazumped 11,661]

57 minutes ago, troggy said:

Like I said, please stay on topic please

The topic is:  "there's a possible bug".  The correct answer is: "no there's not - this is how it works".  I pointed out weeks ago that the only way to get a direct answer on this is to petition Support - who most likely will confirm that permission is given each time a clip is requested.

On 6/1/2020 at 9:55 PM, troggy said:

Clipper works when it has permission to all sites

It's possible to use other methods to copy web pages - printing to PDF forinstance and then attaching to a note.  Clipper is a convenience - use it or not;  your choice.

[PinkElephant 8,094]

… and unless it is activated by the user himself to clip a page, WebClipper just sits around in the browser extensions and does - nothing. Not phoning home, not tracking what the user does, not collecting anything. When activated by the user, it sends website information to the connected EN account as instructed, and goes silent again.

This is not off topic, it is right what security and privacy is about.

[troggy 2]

Just recently Web clipper has been working much more gracefully with Google Chrome's privacy settings. Certainly now on version 100.0.4896.127 (Official Build) (64-bit). Don't know if it's improvements in the Chrome browser or in the Evernote web clipper extension, but hopefully that's the end of this thread now.

[gazumped 11,661]

2 hours ago, troggy said:

Just recently Web clipper has been working much more gracefully with Google Chrome's privacy settings. Certainly now on version 100.0.4896.127 (Official Build) (64-bit). Don't know if it's improvements in the Chrome browser or in the Evernote web clipper extension, but hopefully that's the end of this thread now.

The thread hasn't had any updates for 10 months.  It's not exactly a hot item.

[bill77 10]

I'll bite. Old post or not, I just ran into this. If it doesn't do or know anything until I tell it to clip a page, how did something I searched for on a PC without the main Evernote software installed (only the webclipper) auto-suggest something in the Android app even though I never clipped anything about it and Google is not connected to my Evernote account in anyway?  (This was using standard search, and not 'Ai Powered').

This is the second time in a week I caught this, the first time I blamed on a lapse of judgement of my own because it happened so fast.  The second time, I am certain that the only crossover on the PC is the fact it still has the webclipper installed with permission to freely access all sites.  The kicker is, the autosuggested term the app popped up was miles away , even superficially, from what I was actually trying to type. 

 I'm not that overly worried about it on my end, but to suggest it can't see anything related to sites visited until activating the clipper can't be right.  The autocorrect suggestion the app came up with had nothing to do with what I was searching for in the app, and didn't even begin with the same letters, which was bizarre in it's own right.  I didn't browse anything related to it on my phone, but it was something I browsed within the last hour on the PC with no Evernote program installed or clipper interaction whatsoever. 

 

RE: … and unless it is activated by the user himself to clip a page, WebClipper just sits around in the browser extensions and does - nothing.  Not phoning home, not tracking what the user does, not collecting anything. When activated by the user, it sends website information to the connected EN account as instructed, and goes silent again.

RE: Clipper clips when YOU tell it to clip. I really don’t see a reason to restrict it to only a selection of sites, because it is usually only sitting around in the browser, waiting to be activated by yourself. It is not snooping on pages you visit, it does not send information to remote control servers in the background, it does not filter your web traffic - it only does clip when told to do so. And it only can send content to your account when you authorized it to do so, an access you can revoke at any time.

[PinkElephant 8,094]

Evernote Support Ticket:

 

https://help.evernote.com/hc/en-us/requests/new