<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>DEV Community: Rory</title>
    <description>The latest articles on DEV Community by Rory (@rory_1af399b9b9528d47ab36).</description>
    <link>https://dev.to/rory_1af399b9b9528d47ab36</link>
    
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://dev.to/feed/rory_1af399b9b9528d47ab36"/>
    <language>en</language>
    <item>
      <title>How to fix the "Purple Potassium" Chrome Web Store rejection (and catch it before you submit)</title>
      <dc:creator>Rory</dc:creator>
      <pubDate>Sun, 28 Jun 2026 18:21:21 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>https://dev.to/rory_1af399b9b9528d47ab36/how-to-fix-the-purple-potassium-chrome-web-store-rejection-and-catch-it-before-you-submit-414b</link>
      <guid>https://dev.to/rory_1af399b9b9528d47ab36/how-to-fix-the-purple-potassium-chrome-web-store-rejection-and-catch-it-before-you-submit-414b</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;You submitted your extension, waited days for review, and got back a rejection&lt;br&gt;
with a violation called "Purple Potassium." Your extension looks fine to you, so&lt;br&gt;
what does it even mean? Here is what it is, why it happens, and how to catch it&lt;br&gt;
before you ever hit submit.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  What "Purple Potassium" actually means
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;"Purple Potassium" is Google's internal tag for &lt;strong&gt;excessive or unused&lt;br&gt;
permissions&lt;/strong&gt;. Your manifest requests access to something your code does not&lt;br&gt;
actually use, and the reviewer flags it. It is one of the most common reasons a&lt;br&gt;
Chrome extension gets rejected, and it is frustrating precisely because the&lt;br&gt;
extension works fine in testing. Review is checking something testing never does:&lt;br&gt;
whether every permission you ask for is justified by your code.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  The usual causes
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1. API permissions you declared but never call.&lt;/strong&gt; You added &lt;code&gt;tabs&lt;/code&gt;,&lt;br&gt;
&lt;code&gt;bookmarks&lt;/code&gt;, or &lt;code&gt;cookies&lt;/code&gt; to your manifest at some point, but there is no&lt;br&gt;
&lt;code&gt;chrome.bookmarks.*&lt;/code&gt; call anywhere in your code.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2. Host access that is too broad.&lt;/strong&gt; You requested &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;all_urls&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; when your&lt;br&gt;
extension only touches one site:&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="highlight js-code-highlight"&gt;
&lt;pre class="highlight json"&gt;&lt;code&gt;&lt;span class="err"&gt;//&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="err"&gt;Flagged&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="nl"&gt;"host_permissions"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;[&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="s2"&gt;"&amp;lt;all_urls&amp;gt;"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;]&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt;

&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="err"&gt;//&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="err"&gt;Better&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="nl"&gt;"host_permissions"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;[&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="s2"&gt;"https://*.example.com/*"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;]&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;



&lt;ol&gt;
&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Leftover permissions after removing a feature. You shipped a feature that&lt;br&gt;
needed downloads, later removed the feature, and forgot to remove the&lt;br&gt;
permission.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The tabs misunderstanding. The tabs permission does not grant access&lt;br&gt;
to the tabs API. Basic methods like chrome.tabs.create() work without it. It&lt;br&gt;
only grants four sensitive Tab properties: url, pendingUrl, title, and&lt;br&gt;
favIconUrl. If you declare tabs but never read those, it counts as unused.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ol&gt;

&lt;p&gt;How to fix it by hand&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ol&gt;
&lt;li&gt;List everything in permissions, optional_permissions, and
host_permissions.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;For each one, search your code for the matching chrome. call.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Remove any permission with no usage.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Narrow  and other broad patterns to the specific hosts you need.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;In your reviewer notes, write one plain sentence per sensitive permission
explaining why you need it. Reviewers often lack context, and this prevents
a lot of back and forth.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ol&gt;

&lt;p&gt;This works, but it is tedious and easy to get wrong, especially the tabs and&lt;br&gt;
host-permission rules.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The faster way: lint it before you submit&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I built a small CLI that does this check automatically. Point it at your unpacked&lt;br&gt;
extension directory:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;npx tabsmith-lint ./my-extension&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;It statically reads your code, builds an inventory of which chrome.* APIs you&lt;br&gt;
actually call, and compares that to what your manifest declares. Then it reports&lt;br&gt;
the likely rejection causes with the matching violation IDs, for example:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;[fix] PERM001 Permission "bookmarks" appears unused (Purple Potassium)&lt;br&gt;
  manifest.json:8&lt;br&gt;
  No chrome.bookmarks/browser.bookmarks usage found.&lt;br&gt;
  Fix: remove "bookmarks" unless it is required by code not in this package.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;It also flags broad host access, remote code, and missing or wrong-case file&lt;br&gt;
references. You get a pass / needs fixes / high rejection risk verdict and&lt;br&gt;
exit codes, so you can run it in CI.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;One important caveat&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;This is static analysis, not magic. A linter that tells you to remove a&lt;br&gt;
permission you actually use is worse than no linter, so the unused-permission&lt;br&gt;
rule is deliberately conservative: it ships as a warning, not a hard error, and&lt;br&gt;
it lowers its confidence when it sees dynamic access like chrome[name]. It is&lt;br&gt;
also honest about its limits. Deeply bundled extensions can still hide usage from&lt;br&gt;
it, which is documented.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;If you want to verify the accuracy yourself rather than take my word for it, the&lt;br&gt;
project ships an open benchmark of hand-labeled real extensions and a scorer you&lt;br&gt;
can run with npm run score.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Bottom line&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The Purple Potassium rejection comes down to one rule: request the narrowest&lt;br&gt;
permissions your code actually uses, and nothing more. Audit your manifest&lt;br&gt;
against your code before every submission. Doing it by hand works; running a&lt;br&gt;
linter is faster and catches the cases that are easy to miss.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Tool is MIT and open source: &lt;a href="https://github.com/rsub122/tabsmith-lint" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;https://github.com/rsub122/tabsmith-lint&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
      <category>webdev</category>
      <category>javascript</category>
      <category>extensions</category>
      <category>node</category>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
