Clear the cache without logging yourself out of everything
Free, one click, and cookies are off by default.
The problem with Chrome's own clearing dialog is the layout. The thing you want, dump the cache, sits directly next to the thing that costs you an afternoon, dump every cookie you have. One stray tick and you are signing back into everything.
So here cookies and passwords are off by default, and the choice sticks. One click, no confirmation dialog, no new tab, and it tells you what it cleared afterwards.
The short version
Browser Cleaner dumps the cache in one click and leaves your logins exactly where they were.
- Dump the cache in one click and stay logged into everything, because cookies are off unless you turn them on.
- Keep the handful of sites you never want cleared on an exclusion list.
- Stop opening the Chrome dialog where the safe option and the afternoon-ruining option sit next to each other.
Best for: anyone who clears the cache several times a day while building something.
Replaces: Chrome's own clear-browsing-data dialog, and the one-click cleaners that take your logins with them.
How to use it
- Tick what you want cleared, once. It remembers.
- Add any sites whose cookies should never be touched, like your email and your bank.
- Pick a time range if you do not want everything.
- Click the icon. Done, and it reports what went.
Why the exclusion list took real work
Chrome refuses a request that combines a site exclusion list with data types that are not site-specific. It does not warn you, it does not partially apply, it silently rejects the whole thing and clears nothing at all.
That is a genuinely nasty bug to have, because the extension looks like it worked. Most one-click cleaners have it. This one splits the job into two passes, one for the site-scoped types with your exclusions honoured, one for the rest, and that is why the keep-me-logged-in list actually functions.
What it can access, and why
| Permission | Why it needs it |
|---|---|
| Browsing data | Chrome's own clearing interface. This is the whole function. |
| Local storage | Remembers which types you ticked and your excluded sites. |
| The tab list | To read the current site's domain so you can add it to the keep-logged-in list in one click. |
Full detail in the privacy policy.
The things people ask before installing
Will I lose my logins? Not unless you ask for it. Cookies are off by default, which is the opposite of how most one-click cleaners ship, and the reason those get one-star reviews.
What about the sites I never want touched? Put them on the exclusion list and they survive every clear. Getting that right took more work than the rest of the extension, because Chrome does not offer a clean way to do it.
Does it need to see my browsing? It needs the browsing data permission to delete browsing data, which is unavoidable. It does not read your history, and there is nowhere for it to send anything.
Free, and it stays free. No account, no sign-up, and nothing leaves your browser.
FAQ
What is safe to clear if I do not want to lose anything?
Cache is the safe one and it is what fixes most of the problems people are trying to fix. Cached images and files, plus service workers if a site is serving you a stale version. Leave cookies, passwords and form data alone unless you specifically want to be logged out.
Will clearing the cache fix a site that looks broken?
Often, and more often than people expect once service workers are involved. A site that ships an update while your browser is holding an old service worker will keep serving you the old version until that cache goes. If a hard refresh did not help, this usually will.
Does the exclusion list protect passwords too?
No, and that is a Chrome limit rather than a choice. Exclusions only apply to data Chrome stores per site, which cookies and local storage are. Saved passwords are not scoped that way, so they are all or nothing, which is why they are off by default.
Can I clear just one site?
Yes, by inverting the list. Put everything you want to keep in the exclusion list and clear the site-scoped types. It is a slightly awkward way round and it works.