Compatibility with various Chromium based browsers and other extensions
TL;DR I can't guarantee HTTPSB will run flawlessly on a development version of a Chromium-based browser.
TL;DR I can't guarantee HTTPSB will run flawlessly when installed aside an other extension which also modifies HTTP headers.
I develop and test HTTPSB using the latest official releases of Chromium (currently v34/Linux).
Before publishing to their respective web stores, I test Chrome (v34/Linux&Windows) and Opera (v20/Windows). Once in a while I test the official release of Yandex (it has been a while though). I guess I should set-up a development version of Chromium, but I do not have much time currently to do so.
I know it often happens people report that HTTPSB has some malfunctions with a development version of one of the Chromium-based browsers, malfunctions which I often can't reproduce on an official release.
I will list here known issues, benign or serious, with other extensions.
NOT COMPATIBLE.
"Not compatible" in the strictest sense, but sometimes the parts that are "broken" may not be enough to justify the removal of the "incompatible" extension.
Chrome API allows only ONE extension to modify request or response headers, and the last one installed wins.
Since modifying request and response headers is key for HTTPSB to perform its duty reliably (disabling javascript execution, stripping outgoing cookies, referer, etc.), consider that any extension which requires modifying HTTP headers is strictly incompatible with HTTPSB: One of the two extensions won't be able to do its job, which in the case of HTTPSB is critical in the case of response headers (to disable inline javascript).
Note that their is no way for HTTPSB to find out and notify the user on whether it failed to properly modify the headers, so you are ultimately responsible for ensuring HTTPSB is the only extension installed which modifies headers, or its the last one installed (in which case other extensions which modify headers won't work properly). Chromium will warn though when there is a conflict between extensions.
This warning applies to all extensions listed below, I didn't specifically check whether they modify HTTP headers, so aside the specific issues found, you will have to ensure as well they do not modify HTTP headers.
I know many users install other sort of blockers alongside HTTPSB, so if any of these blockers modifies the headers, than the resulting protection you get could be less than if you were using any of them alone.
[TODO: feature comparison with other blockers so that people can make an informed choice]
[TODO: provide diagnostic pages at http://raymondhill.net/httpsb]
Compatible.
Both extensions may try to replace the content of <iframe> objects with harmless content using a redirect operation. When this happens, the browser will warn of a conflict, but the result is harmless because whoever wins, the <iframe> objects will end up being properly neutralized.
Privacy Badger (from EFF)
Strictly speaking, not compatible, but still can be used together meaningfully is you install Privacy Badger with HTTPSB and accept that some of privacy-related features of one of the extensions will not work (reliably).
Both extensions modify outgoing request headers, and since the chrome API (as of Chromium 34) does not allow more than one extension to modify HTTP headers, one of the two extensions may end up being unable to do what it is supposed to do.
As per chrome API, the last extension installed (not the same as enabled) wins. So this means:
- If Privacy Badger is installed last, then HTTPSB...
- will not be able to remove outbound cookies as per matrix
- will still be able to delete them from the browser
- will not be able to strip referer information as per matrix
- will not be able to spoof user-agent information
- If HTTPSB is installed last, then Privacy Badger...
- will not be able to remove outbound cookies as per its own heuristic
- will not be able to inject the Do Not Track header into request headers
After having read how Privacy Badger works, I actually think it is an excellent complementary extension to use aside HTTPSB, especially if you use HTTPSB in a permissive way (for example allow-all/block-exceptionally).
So if you wish to use HTTPSB along with Privacy Badger, installing Privacy Badger before or after depends on the results you wish:
If you want Privacy Badger to completely control your outbound cookies as per its own heuristics, install Privacy Badger after HTTPSB.
If you want HTTPSB to completely control your outbound cookies as per its matrix state, install HTTPSB after Privacy Badger.
Regardless of the choice, Privacy Badger will still be able to be "trained" and block net requests to servers which are deemed untrustworthy, and HTTPSB will still be able to block net requests as per its matrix and ABP filtering engines.
IMPORTANT: Privacy Badger relies on being able to perform XmlHttpRequests to the servers it evaluates (it requests their dnt-policy.txt file). Therefore this means you will have to ensure the XHR cell in the matrix is whitelisted for the chromium-behind-the-scene scope in order to not trip Privacy Badger's evaluation of 3rd-parties.
ScriptSafe doesn't work properly with HTTPSB when scripts are blocked by HTTPSB.
HTTPSB blocks javascript execution using a Content Security Policy directive (ScriptSafe uses chrome.contentSettings.javascript.set.)
The use of a Content Security Policy by HTTPSB prevents script files from even being requested, and as a result chrome.webRequest.OnBeforeRequest is not fired for these external files, which causes ScriptSafe to not see the existence of these files, therefore they won't appears in ScriptSafe user interface, therefore they can't be whitelisted.
Allowing 1st-party scripts in HTTPSB causes ScriptSafe to be able to see external scripts.
Since their purpose overlap a lot, my advice is to stick to one extension or the other, and not have both installed and enabled at the same time.