Flash is evil

[AvianFlux]

Tim Smith wrote:
> In the long run, it doesn't matter, as more and more people are
getting
> broadband, where they either have static IP addresses, or they have
> dynamic addresses that very rarely change. Combine that with hard
disk
> space being dirt cheap, and pretty much everything that a site can do

> with a cookie on your computer, they can do with a database on their
> server.
>
>
> --
> --Tim Smith

There's something to be said for dial up connections.

One) It's cheaper.

Two) Can be accessed over any available phone line connection.

Three) More secure, anonymous, dynamic IP's.


I'm sticking with dial up. It's all I really need.

[optikl]

Vanguard wrote:

>
> Some sites only provide a Flash-enabled web page because they want to
> hide how their web site is structured so some bozo with a web crawler or
> spider can't steal their web site. You'll find that you won't be able
> to visit those web sites. They may provide a non-Flash equivalent page
> but they may not. Just like it is your choice not to install and
> support Flash content, it is just as much a web site's owner choice not
> to let you steal their web site pages. So far, I haven't hit many sites
> that are Flash-only sites but I have hit some, like my own ISP's home
> page which paints a page that Flash must be installed to view their home
> page (they no longer provide a non-Flash version if the Flash detect
> fails).
>
Vanguard, from the headers of your post, you appear to use Comcast. They
do have a non-flash version of their start pages. I was there yesterday
after turning flash off, via SpywareBlaster, for testing purposes. That
is, unless my meds were cranked way too high...

[Miles]

Which setting is better?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"AvianFlux" <neomoniker@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1112394939.244770.236750@l41g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
A solution is provided by 'Macromedia Flash Players Settings Manager'
at:

http://www.macromedia.com/support/do...manager02.html

Adjust your 'Global' and 'Website' security-privacy settings there.

"optikl" <optikl@com_invalid_cast.net> wrote in message
news:nL6dnbeu7NUJPdPfRVn-vQ@comcast.com...
> Vanguard wrote:
>
>>
>> Some sites only provide a Flash-enabled web page because they want to
>> hide how their web site is structured so some bozo with a web crawler
>> or spider can't steal their web site. You'll find that you won't be
>> able to visit those web sites. They may provide a non-Flash
>> equivalent page but they may not. Just like it is your choice not to
>> install and support Flash content, it is just as much a web site's
>> owner choice not to let you steal their web site pages. So far, I
>> haven't hit many sites that are Flash-only sites but I have hit some,
>> like my own ISP's home page which paints a page that Flash must be
>> installed to view their home page (they no longer provide a non-Flash
>> version if the Flash detect fails).
>>
> Vanguard, from the headers of your post, you appear to use Comcast.
> They do have a non-flash version of their start pages. I was there
> yesterday after turning flash off, via SpywareBlaster, for testing
> purposes. That is, unless my meds were cranked way too high...


I started with Flash disabled. When visiting http://www.comcast.net, if
you disable Javascript then you won't get any of their home pages. All
you get is a white-on-blue page with just the text string "Please enable
Javascript in your browser to continue". So they refuse to provide a
non-Javascripted home page. If you enable Javascript but have cookies
blocked then their scripts screws up in continually retrying to detect
Flash which results in a super-long wait that eventually you abandon the
attempt to get a page. With Javascript and cookies enabled, you will
get their http://www.comcast.net/flashUpgrade.html page which tells you
that you need to install Flash to visit their site. There is a "Go to
Lite" link which will take you to their non-Flash home page at
http://www.comcast.net/lite/ (but I am not taken there automatically
when Flash detection fails). So:

1. They won't paint a page unless you have Javascript enabled.
2. Their scripts get stuck in a indefinite loop trying to detect Flash
if cookies are blocked.
3. With Javascript enabled (to get past their first detection) and with
cookies enabled (so their scripts work) but with Flash still disabled,
you get their page telling you to install Flash (with a link to their
"lite" non-Flash page).

Their "lite" page is a crappy design. They used to have a non-Flash
page that looked similar to their Flash page.

--
__________________________________________________ __________
Post your replies to the newsgroup. Share with others.
E-mail reply: Remove "NIXTHIS" and add "#VS811" to Subject.
__________________________________________________ __________

[optikl]

Vanguard wrote:

>
> Their "lite" page is a crappy design. They used to have a non-Flash
> page that looked similar to their Flash page.

Without question, it looks low-end.

[AvianFlux]

Set everything to maximum privacy-security settings, i.e., no/none (0
kb) allowable website storage, lock out camera & microphone remote
access, delete all existing Flash Media website's from the storage
files.

Right click on the 'Macromedia Flash Player Settings Manager' to launch
the Flash Media local settings control panel, and do the same thing
there.

Just disable, and set to 'None', every available feature, and
empty/delete the stored Flash Player files.

[Jay T. Blocksom]

On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 20:42:01 +0000 (UTC), in <alt.privacy.spyware>,
arnstein@panix.com (David Arnstein) wrote:

> This article from Yahoo/techweb describes a spying technique that uses
> features of Macromedia Flash:
>
[snip]

It's already being discussed in another thread:

Message-ID: <fo4r415inht3in9uvs2kqhii3promp35b1@4ax.com>
(and f'ups thereto)

> I thihk that I will just remove Macromedia software instead.
>
[snip]

What took you so long to reach that decision?

Note the date on this article:

<http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0%2C1558%2C863408%2C00.asp>

> I hope that the anti-spyware vendors will provide features to control
> these "shared objects."

Unnecessary. The complete and totally effective cure is to simply not permit
Macromedia products to be installed on your system(s).

--

Jay T. Blocksom
--------------------------------
Appropriate Technology, Inc.
usenet02[at]appropriate-tech.net

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this domain is expressly prohibited under
47 USC S227 and State Law. Violators are subject to prosecution.

[Jay T. Blocksom]

On 1 Apr 2005 14:35:39 -0800, in <alt.privacy.spyware>, "AvianFlux"
<neomoniker@hotmail.com> wrote:

> A solution is provided by 'Macromedia Flash Players Settings Manager'
> at:
>
> http://www.macromedia.[REDACTED]
>
> Adjust your 'Global' and 'Website' security-privacy settings there.

And you trust the wolf to guard your henhouse because...?

--

Jay T. Blocksom
--------------------------------
Appropriate Technology, Inc.
usenet02[at]appropriate-tech.net

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this domain is expressly prohibited under
47 USC S227 and State Law. Violators are subject to prosecution.

[AvianFlux]

Jay T. Blocksom wrote:
> And you trust the wolf to guard your henhouse because...?

Because Macromedia is a reputable firm as far as I know. They have
everything to loose and nothing to gain if they become known other
wise.

Do I trust them? No - I monitor them and everyone else.

[Rick]

Jay T. Blocksom <not.deliverable+usenet02@appropriate-tech.net> wrote in
news:jeuu41dqeqdeps2olnev68io0bad479oti@news.speak easy.net:

>
> > I thihk that I will just remove Macromedia software instead.
>
> What took you so long to reach that decision?
>
> Note the date on this article:
>
> <http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0%2C1558%2C863408%2C00.asp>

Not that I'm overly fond of Macromedia, but the article you referenced is
dealing with Macrovision, not Macromedia. Two different companies as far as
I know.


--
Rick Simon rsimon@cris.com

Include "spam(trap)key" somewhere in the
body of any email to avoid spam filters.