> > > > Ugh! > > I don't think there is going to be a way to make it impossible to > write poorly written extensions. Perhaps sync should have a way to > detect lots of mutations from an extension and then disable either the > extension or itself at some point with a suitable warning. It should > certainly be possible to track number of mutations from an extension > and to know which extension is the result of the mutations.
Yes, I just added ExtensionsActivityMonitor to get this kind of data. Our quickfix idea is precisely to do this and kill either the extension or Chrome Sync if we detect that things get out of hand. But this feels like a problem that could be nipped at a lower level than Chrome Sync. If we have this kind of data available, we could make it available to the developers by reporting quota-limited extensions so they can realize that their extension is acting wrongly. Maybe they already know and/or won't do anything about it. Either way, we will likely need to disable that extension *anyway *if it is bringing down *our* service. So if we have to solve this problem for "us", I don't see a great reason not to offer the help to "them" (e.g if Chrome Sync isn't installed) by reporting the data back and choking the traffic at its origin, instead of falling back and relying on our sync servers to differentiate traffic from different parts of the client (which would have to be done at the point when our actual Chrome sync protocol messages are being processed, which means all the server infrastructure treats these requests as "valid" until quite late in the chain eating up resources along the way). Granted, I'm not an extensions developer, but I have a hard time believing this wouldn't be a useful and friendly feature to offer. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
