Adobe acknowledges critical remote vulnerability in Flash, exploits already in the wild

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 94
    baconstangbaconstang Posts: 1,191member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    The more the better. Apple has lots of security updates, they just don't make the news on AI.




    Really?  You're equating Adobe's security with Apple's?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 62 of 94
    baconstangbaconstang Posts: 1,191member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    The more the better. Apple has lots of security updates, they just don't make the news on AI.




    And besides, I don't auto update Apple either.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 63 of 94
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:



    Really?  You're equating Adobe's security with Apple's?


    I think I receive more security updates from Apple than I do from Adobe. Maybe there is a correlation but all I'm saying is that ALL security updates are good.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 64 of 94
    baconstangbaconstang Posts: 1,191member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    I think I receive more security updates from Apple than I do from Adobe. Maybe there is a correlation but all I'm saying is that ALL security updates are good.




    Generally updates are good.  Though I like to see what people experience first.  Some can be problematic.

    For me, Flash issues about 3X the number of update that Apple does.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 65 of 94
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by baconstang View Post

    Generally updates are good.  Though I like to see what people experience first.  Some can be problematic.

    For me, Flash issues about 3X the number of update that Apple does.


    Seriously you are in some sort of denial with a strong bias against Adobe, A lot of credit is due to Apple for their continued effort to patch even older versions of their software but equally a company like Adobe is not going to let vulnerabilities go un patched either. It is fine if you don't like Adobe but you ca't fault their commitment to keeping their software updated.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 66 of 94
    elrothelroth Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MacItAll View Post



    I have the bad .287 version running in Win 8.1 VM on Parallels, when I go to update, MS says I have the most recent version, and so does Adobe's web page. I have disabled it for now. MS just installed some automatic updates as well, still no sign of the newer version.



    I updated the Mac version to .296 through the Flash System Preferences pane. But get this: Adobe's description for the update mentions improved video and new APIs, but not a single word about it being a critical security update.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 67 of 94

    Well, I've tried to solve the puzzle of my stuttering video on BBC iPlayer. I went into developer mode and pretended to be an iPad, and turned off plugins. It duly loaded the html version. No stuttering at all. Unfortunately, going full screen doesn't work properly on an iMac; it doesn't centre and the resolution is very poor.

     

    So it seems that the problem lies with Flash one way or another. I’ll try using it on a guest account and see if it stutters there. I also tried turning off private browsing, turning off extensions, enabling storage in system preferences, but the stuttering continued even then. Either I've got a corruption somewhere or Adobe's implementation is faulty.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 68 of 94
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by baconstang View Post

     



    What happens when someone figures a way to hack the auto update?


     

    I choose not to live a bi-polar paranoid life where the boogeyman is hiding behind every bush. I was online before Netscape appeared in Andreesen’s wet dreams. My online life is lived “informed but not alarmed.” I want to understand the Thunderstrike exploit but I also know that the chances of me being hit by it are about the same as being hit by a meteorite falling from the sky. Same goes for Flash. It is not the piece of crap Apple fanboys make it out to be and it certainly not going away anytime soon. Because “Steve” didn’t like it doesn’t mean it’s evil. Quicktime, now there’s an evil, useless piece of code that nobody uses anymore.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 69 of 94
    mpantonempantone Posts: 2,485member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

     

    Because “Steve” didn’t like it doesn’t mean it’s evil.


    Correct, but it's still evil regardless of what Steve thought about it.

     

    Flash can't die soon enough. Most mobile platforms don't support it, it's a dinosaur. It'll eventually go the way of the HTML <blink> tag.

     

    Plus Flash is a  COMPLETE RESOURCE PIG.

     

    Even Adobe knows this. That's one of the main reasons why Flash doesn't exist on mobile platforms, period. They gave up trying to get it to run on various mobile platforms because they knew what an atrocious, power-sucking piece of garbage it was.

     

    We didn't kill Flash on mobile devices. Adobe did.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 70 of 94
    I finally decided to kill it on my system as well. I have Chrome as an alternate browser when a site absolutely requires flash. Otherwise, screw it.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 71 of 94
    volcanvolcan Posts: 1,799member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mpantone View Post

     COMPLETE RESOURCE PIG.

     


    What does that mean? Every application has a memory requirement. It all depends on what functionality the application provides verses whether or not you have enough memory to support it.  If you don't want to enable it, don't.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 72 of 94
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    lkrupp wrote: »

    A pain in the ass to update? Flash updates automatically. I read this article and checked. Flash had already been updated to this version on my system. I didn’t do anything (except having set the Flash preference panel to automatically update long ago.) 

    I have that setting checked on in the System Preferences pane and yet it still pops up a window saying that I need to install Flash which then takes me to their website where I need to download a DMG, mount it, install it (asks for admin credentials), then kill all open browsers to install it, and then it asks for admin credentials a second time, then remove the mounted DMG and the downloaded DMG.


    400
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 73 of 94
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    volcan wrote: »
    What does that mean? Every application has a memory requirement. It all depends on what functionality the application provides verses whether or not you have enough memory to support it.  If you don't want to enable it, don't.

    It means Adobe Flash is atypical high.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 74 of 94
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

    Apple has lots of security updates, they just don't make the news on AI.

     

    They don’t make it to my App Store, either. Because they don’t exist.

     

    Yes, security updates, but not as often as Adobe requires, which is the point.

     

    ‘Course, compared to Microsoft, Adobe looks like a bastion of reliability.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 75 of 94
    mpantonempantone Posts: 2,485member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Volcan View Post

     

    What does that mean? Every application has a memory requirement. It all depends on what functionality the application provides verses whether or not you have enough memory to support it.  If you don't want to enable it, don't.




    Flash is a CPU pig.

    That's why Steve eventually refused to let Apple pre-install Flash on MacBooks.

     

    This is also why Adobe gave up developing Flash for mobile operating systems. It's big old battery hog.

     

    If you care about battery life on your notebook computers, you'd never install Flash nor ever run Google Chrome web browser (with its built-in Flash extension, Pepperflash).

     

    Worse, it's a highly-exploitable browser extension. Even if it weren't the resource pig that it is, you still would be a masochistic fool to run it, simply for its very real security risks which is what this update is all about. And the one coming next week, to patch the other major existing vulnerability known at this time.

     

    The primary reasons why I use ad blockers on web browsers are security and privacy. My reasoning is thus unassailable.

     

    Adobe Flash is skankware. It's the herpes simplex of browser extensions. If you care about your Mac, don't install Flash. So nasty.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 76 of 94
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,398member

    Flash is absolutely disgusting, as is the horrendous nature of how its coded. The update process is such a fucking chore, I tend to put it off for days, even though  know it's a critical vulnerability. Have to quit all browsers, then it opens like 2 apps that bounce around in the dock, bunch of pop-up windows, and half the time asks you to restart when its done. So jarring when you're used to silent, auto-updates. 

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 77 of 94
    I run Safari with Flash and Java shut down. Keep the Develop menu lit and have a keyboard shortcut to throw the user agent to the current iPad Safari in a pinch.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 78 of 94

    After testing, having Safari set to “Block” by default when Flash is installed DOES still report to websites that Flash is installed.

     

    I don’t like that (and as such deleted Flash again).

     

    How hard would it have been for Safari 8 to do that? I think that would have been great.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 79 of 94
    jexusjexus Posts: 373member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post



    Worse, they still haven't realized that Microsoft is no longer dominant, so they demand submissions in .docx and that coding work (and not VB, mind you) be done in Visual Studio, because XCode is dirty or something.

     

    The first complaint is silly on their part, the second is silly on yours.

     

    Visual studio is still a far superior IDE to Xcode. Xcode isn't bad, it is just average, but Visual studio is top of the line and makes it look worse.

     

    That being said....Flash needs to go already.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 80 of 94
    jexus wrote: »
    The first complaint is silly on their part, the second is silly on yours.

    Visual studio is still a far superior IDE to Xcode. Xcode isn't bad, it is just average, but Visual studio is top of the line and makes it look worse.

    That being said....Flash needs to go already.

    I don't hate Visual Studio, but for basic C++ XCode would be fine.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.