Is "Daktela" on Chrome Web Store Safe to Install?
Control calls directly from your browser. The Browser extension is always available, no matter where your workflow is. What does this plugin allow within the browser? Answering and rejecting calls and other activities: Never miss your incoming activity notifications – pin your extension and always have it ready. Logging in and out of queues and devices: Easily manage what queues and devices you need to work with. Dialling calls manually: Enter a phone number or dial a contact or account from your CRM. Starting and ending pauses: Manage your user states at the click of a button. Track the time you have spent on different tasks and breaks. Sending direct SMS messages: Send outgoing SMSs to your contacts or start SMS chats, allowing you to have realtime conversations with your customers.
Risk Assessment
Analyzed11255 security findings detected across all analyzers
Chrome extension requesting 4 permissions
Severity Breakdown
Finding Categories
Requested Permissions
4 permissionsAccess and modify data on every website you visit
About This Extension
Detailed Findings
1000 totalAI Security Report
AI Security Analysis: Daktela
Analysis generated: 2025-12-11T16:35:37+13:00
Model: gemini-3-pro-preview
Quick Facts
| Property | Value |
|---|---|
| UUID | 039c2574-a90d-5fce-afc6-671fad1d99b8 |
| Type | chrome |
| Version | |
| Users | 825 |
| Risk Score | 100.0/100 (CRITICAL) |
| Malware Detected | ⚠️ Yes |
| Secrets Exposed | ✅ No |
| Critical Vulns | ✅ No |
AI Analysis
Executive Summary
The Daktela extension has been assigned a CRITICAL risk score of 100/100 by the automated scanning system. However, a manual review suggests this score is likely inflated by false positives inherent to the technology used to build the extension. The extension appears to be built using the Flutter/Dart framework, which generates complex, minified JavaScript code that automated scanners frequently misinterpret as malicious obfuscation and malware. The primary genuine security concern is the Unverified Publisher status, which poses a supply chain risk for an enterprise communication tool.
Threat Assessment
Code Structure & Obfuscation
The analysis flagged over 2,300 instances of "obfuscation," specifically UNICODE_HEAVY patterns.
- Context: The file names identified (e.g.,
main.dart.js_2.part.js) confirm this extension was developed using Flutter, a framework that compiles Dart code into JavaScript. - Assessment: Flutter's compilation process (dart2js) naturally produces dense, non-human-readable code with heavy Unicode usage to manage types and structures. This is a technical artifact of the framework, not necessarily an intentional attempt to hide malicious logic.
Malware Indicators
The system flagged 192 malware signatures.
- Context: While a high number, these are likely heuristic matches triggered by the same dense code structure mentioned above. When scanners encounter the compressed logic of a Flutter app, they often trigger generic "packer" or "obfuscator" signatures associated with malware.
- Assessment: Without specific signature names (e.g., "Trojan.Generic"), these are likely false positives, though they cannot be dismissed entirely without dynamic analysis.
Publisher Trust
- Status: Unverified Publisher.
- Assessment: This is the most significant real threat. Daktela is a legitimate omnichannel communication platform. If this extension is not published by the official Daktela organization, it could be a counterfeit extension designed to steal credentials or intercept communications. The lack of verification is a major red flag for an enterprise tool.
Risk Justification
The 100/100 Risk Score is technically justified by the raw data but likely functionally inaccurate:
- Inflation Factors: The score is driven by the sheer volume of findings (11,000+) and the presence of "malware signatures."
- Analyst Adjustment: The risk is HIGH (rather than Critical) primarily due to the Unverified Publisher status and the potential for this to be a spoofed extension. The code-level findings are likely benign artifacts of the Flutter framework.
Key Findings
- High Volume of Obfuscation (2,315 findings): Detected in
main.dart.js, indicating the use of the Flutter framework. This hinders static analysis but is standard for this technology stack. - Unverified Publisher: The extension is not linked to a verified identity on the Chrome Web Store, raising the risk of it being a counterfeit tool.
- Malware Signatures (192 findings): A significant number of heuristic matches, likely triggered by the Dart-to-JS compilation process.
- Excessive IOC Count (8,685 findings): The scanner flagged thousands of strings as Indicators of Compromise. In a legitimate CRM/Communication tool, this often represents legitimate integrations, API endpoints, or internal routing tables that the scanner misidentified as malicious domains.
Recommendations
- Verify Authenticity (CRITICAL): Contact Daktela support or your account manager immediately to confirm if UUID
039c2574-a90d-5fce-afc6-671fad1d99b8is their official Chrome extension. Do not deploy until confirmed. - Dynamic Analysis: Due to the heavy "obfuscation" (compilation), static analysis is insufficient. The extension must be run in a sandboxed environment to observe network traffic. Ensure it only communicates with known Daktela domains.
- Restrict Deployment: Do not allow widespread installation until the publisher status is verified.
- Credential Monitoring: If this extension has already been used, ensure 2FA is enforced on Daktela accounts, as a counterfeit extension would likely target login credentials.
Mitigation Strategies
If the extension is confirmed as legitimate by the vendor but you must use it despite the findings:
- Network Allow-listing: Configure the host firewall or EDR to only allow the browser to communicate with
*.daktela.com(and other specific Daktela-related domains) to mitigate data exfiltration risks. - Browser Policy: Use Chrome Enterprise policies to pin the extension to this specific version and prevent auto-updates until the publisher verifies their account.
Confidence Assessment
Confidence Level: 80%
I am highly confident that the "obfuscation" and "malware" findings are false positives caused by the Flutter/Dart framework. However, without dynamic analysis (runtime testing) or official confirmation from the vendor regarding the UUID, I cannot rule out that this is a sophisticated counterfeit extension hiding within a Flutter wrapper.
Disclaimer
This analysis was generated by an AI model and should be reviewed by security professionals. The findings are based on automated security scanning and may include false positives. Always verify critical findings manually before taking action.
Source Code Not Available
Source code is not available for this version of the extension.
Frequently Asked Questions
Similar Extensions
Related extensions from the same publisher or marketplace
MAGgie - An AI Assistant
[email protected]
Send to NotebookLM
[email protected]
ChromeCompare
[email protected]
Aintivirus Privacy and Wallet
[email protected]
FormGenieAI
[email protected]
BugZap — Visual Bug Reporter
[email protected]