Firefox is certainly an attractive application. I like the attitude of the
people behind it.
Chris
> On 18 Jul 2015, at 16:58, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Flash is always under attack since, just like IE, it's the most common thing
> out there. The most recent flurry of updates was supposedly caused by the
> hack of an Italian security firm which had found these Flash vulnerabilities
> and kept them to themselves under (insecure) lock and key.
>
> In response to Brian, I doubt that Firefox is the cause of his problems. I
> don't think that going back to IE is a solution. At least with Firefox you
> can install but disable Flash or set it so that you'll be queried if you want
> to allow it to run. That's what I do. About 90% of the time allowing Flash
> to run is only allowing advertising videos to run. It's usually not required
> for the content you're interested in. But, if it is, you can allow it on a
> case by case basis or for a domain as a whole.
>
> Google supports Flash in Chrome but it's embedded in Chrome and not via a
> plug-in or add-on. That means that when Flash needs to be updated your fix
> comes in the way of an update to Chrome. Google claimed that the way they
> have Flash embedded means that Flash stays behind a security sandbox. But
> these last breaches were supposedly able to figure their way out of the
> Google sandbox.
>
> I prefer the Firefox solution. Most of the time I don't allow it to run at
> all but, if I'm really interested in something at what I consider a fairly
> secure site I will allow it.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|