Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[GerardJan]

Paul in Houston, TX wrote:

Lee wrote:

Hi,

On 11/28/15, Paul in Houston, TX  wrote:



https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/flash-player/apsb15-28.html
says the current version is 19.0.0.245


Thanks for the heads-up about Flash .245.


+1 for turning javascript off.  But way too many sites don't work if
JS is turned off.  It's kind of a pain getting the permissions set
right, but using noscript & request policy continued is the best
mitigation I've found for enabling JS.

Anyone have other suggestions for staying (relatively) safe with JS enabled?


I use both Quick JS toggle and Yes Script for blacklisting.
Did not like No Script.


Regards,
Lee




I use version: 11.2.202.540

no problems what so ever...

regards,



--
Gertjan back on Fedora 20
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0 
SeaMonkey/2.39

Build identifier: 20151103174305
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[GerardJan]

GerardJan wrote:

Paul in Houston, TX wrote:

Lee wrote:

Hi,

On 11/28/15, Paul in Houston, TX  wrote:



https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/flash-player/apsb15-28.html
says the current version is 19.0.0.245


Thanks for the heads-up about Flash .245.


+1 for turning javascript off.  But way too many sites don't work if
JS is turned off.  It's kind of a pain getting the permissions set
right, but using noscript & request policy continued is the best
mitigation I've found for enabling JS.

Anyone have other suggestions for staying (relatively) safe with JS enabled?


I use both Quick JS toggle and Yes Script for blacklisting.
Did not like No Script.


Regards,
Lee




I use version: 11.2.202.540

no problems what so ever...

regards,





to be precisely :

File: libflashplayer.so
Path: /home/gerardjan/Downloads/seamonkey-2.39/plugins/libflashplayer.so
Version: 11.2.202.540
State: Enabled
Shockwave Flash 11.2 r202



--
Gertjan back on Fedora 20
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0 
SeaMonkey/2.39

Build identifier: 20151103174305
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[EE]

Lee wrote:

On 11/29/15, Paul in Houston, TX  wrote:

Lee wrote:

Hi,

On 11/28/15, Paul in Houston, TX  wrote:

<.. snip bits about flash ..>

+1 for turning javascript off.  But way too many sites don't work if
JS is turned off.  It's kind of a pain getting the permissions set
right, but using noscript & request policy continued is the best
mitigation I've found for enabling JS.

Anyone have other suggestions for staying (relatively) safe with JS
enabled?


I use both Quick JS toggle and Yes Script for blacklisting.


Thanks for the info.  Blacklisting is what A/V programs do & they
leave much to be desired -- an opinion the Yse Script author shares:
"Unlike NoScript, YesScript does absolutely nothing to improve your
security. "   We differ on "... Firefox is secure enough by default
and that blocking all scripts by default is paranoia. "Maybe he
hasn't read things like
   https://blog.avast.com/2015/08/20/infected-ad-networks-hit-popular-websites/
 This week security researchers discovered booby-trapped
advertisements on popular
 websites including eBay, The Drudge Report, weather.com, and AOL.
The ads, some of
 which can be initiated by a drive-by attack without the user’s
knowledge or even any
 action, infected computers with adware or locked them down with ransomware.


Did not like No Script.


I hear ya - but the alternatives if you do enable JS aren't all that great.

Regards,
Lee

That is why it is a good idea to have an adblocker as well as a 
javascript blocker.  Most of the sites I visit do not cause problems by 
using javascript, but there are a few that do, so I use YesScript, and I 
also have Adblock Plus with 4 subscriptions.


___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[Lee]

On 11/29/15, Paul in Houston, TX  wrote:
> Lee wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 11/28/15, Paul in Houston, TX  wrote:
   <.. snip bits about flash ..>
>> +1 for turning javascript off.  But way too many sites don't work if
>> JS is turned off.  It's kind of a pain getting the permissions set
>> right, but using noscript & request policy continued is the best
>> mitigation I've found for enabling JS.
>>
>> Anyone have other suggestions for staying (relatively) safe with JS
>> enabled?
>
> I use both Quick JS toggle and Yes Script for blacklisting.

Thanks for the info.  Blacklisting is what A/V programs do & they
leave much to be desired -- an opinion the Yse Script author shares:
"Unlike NoScript, YesScript does absolutely nothing to improve your
security. "   We differ on "... Firefox is secure enough by default
and that blocking all scripts by default is paranoia. "Maybe he
hasn't read things like
  https://blog.avast.com/2015/08/20/infected-ad-networks-hit-popular-websites/
This week security researchers discovered booby-trapped
advertisements on popular
websites including eBay, The Drudge Report, weather.com, and AOL.
The ads, some of
which can be initiated by a drive-by attack without the user’s
knowledge or even any
action, infected computers with adware or locked them down with ransomware.

> Did not like No Script.

I hear ya - but the alternatives if you do enable JS aren't all that great.

Regards,
Lee
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[Paul in Houston, TX]

Lee wrote:

Hi,

On 11/28/15, Paul in Houston, TX  wrote:



https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/flash-player/apsb15-28.html
says the current version is 19.0.0.245


Thanks for the heads-up about Flash .245.


+1 for turning javascript off.  But way too many sites don't work if
JS is turned off.  It's kind of a pain getting the permissions set
right, but using noscript & request policy continued is the best
mitigation I've found for enabling JS.

Anyone have other suggestions for staying (relatively) safe with JS enabled?


I use both Quick JS toggle and Yes Script for blacklisting.
Did not like No Script.


Regards,
Lee


___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[EE]

Ed Mullen wrote:

David E. Ross wrote on 11/28/2015 7:51 PM:

On 11/28/2015 10:36 AM, Ed Mullen wrote:

David E. Ross wrote on 11/28/2015 1:10 PM:

On 11/28/2015 9:24 AM, DoctorBill wrote:

I read in several places that Flash Player is
dangerous as it can allow Viruses and Trojans
into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/

Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB



Many others claim Flash is indeed dangerous in that it allows malware
access to your computer.  Since security vulnerabilities in Flash are
not found as frequently as such vulnerabilities in various versions of
Windows, I do not worry about that.

However, I often find Flash to be annoying.  While I have Flash
installed, I also have the Flashblock extension installed and enabled.
For SeaMonkey, get Flashblock 1.3.20 (NOT 1.5.17) from
.



You don't really need Flashblock anymore.  Just set to "Always ask" in
the add-ons manager.




I am not sure, but I think that enabling Flash from an "Always ask"
setting will enable it for all the Flash on the current Web page.  Some
Web pages have more than one Flash.  Flashblock allows me to play the
one Flash I select without playing the others on the same page.



Never seen "Always ask" to fail. No experience with Flashblock as I work
to minimize installed extensions.


With Firefox now, the click-to-play permission is per site, but not with 
SeaMonkey.  SM still treats click-to-play as per item.


___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[EE]

DoctorBill wrote:

EE wrote:

Ed Mullen wrote:

DoctorBill wrote on 11/28/2015 12:24 PM:

I read in several places that Flash Player is
dangerous as it can allow
Viruses and Trojans
into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/


Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB


That is not Flash Player.  It's an extension
specifically designed to
force You Tube to deliver videos using Flash
rather than HTML5.

If you need the Flash Player/plugin go
download/install it from:



Remember to UNcheck the McAfee Optional offer.


A better place to get the Flash player is here:
https://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/distribution3.html


There is no extra crap dumped on you from that page.



As someone who knows about these things, would YOU recommend that
Mozilla Flash Extension over using the (now resident?) HTML5 player.

Sometimes (not always) YouTube Videos (especially music ones) are choppy
and have pauses, etc.

Would I NOT have that with the Mozilla Extension ?


It is not Mozilla Flash, but Adobe Flash, and it is a plugin, not an 
extension.


I do not think HTML5 is ready for prime time yet.  It still does things 
I do not like, like defaulting to the lowest possible resolution.


___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[EE]

Ed Mullen wrote:

Paul in Houston, TX wrote on 11/28/2015 1:34 PM:

Everything is dangerous to some extent.  I know that Flash works good
with XP3.
If you use Flash, be sure to install the latest version.
It is 19.0.0.226 for Windows as of Saturday, Nov 28, 2015.
Be sure to set Flash cache to zero and run Ccleaner or Bleachbit
periodically
to remove the flash cookies.
To be even safer make sure JS is OFF and stays OFF.



Doing that will break an awful lot of valid sites that require
javascript to function.  Bank of America comes to mind.



Flash will not work without javascript.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[Rick Merrill]

On 11/28/2015 12:24 PM, DoctorBill wrote:

I read in several places that Flash Player is dangerous as it can allow
Viruses and Trojans
into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/

Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB



See Wired's article: "Flash Must Die"

http://www.wired.com/2015/07/adobe-flash-player-die/

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[Lee]

Hi,

On 11/28/15, Paul in Houston, TX  wrote:
> DoctorBill wrote:
>> I read in several places that Flash Player is dangerous as it can allow
>> Viruses and Trojans
>> into your system.
>> I went to Mozilla.org then this;
>> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/
>>
>> Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.

The current version of SM is 2.39; running SM 2.33.1 is unsafe.

>> Please eschew comments on XP !

As long as you eschew using an admin account for general use )
Use the admin account for administering the machine & use an account
with no privileges for general use -- like using Flash & SM 2.33.1

And use things like
https://www.virustotal.com/
https://malwr.com/submission/
https://virusscan.jotti.org/
http://www.virscan.org/
to check out a program before installing it.


>> Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
>> Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?
>>
>> Danke, danke.
>>
>> DB
>
> Everything is dangerous to some extent.  I know that Flash works good with
> XP3.
> If you use Flash, be sure to install the latest version.
> It is 19.0.0.226 for Windows as of Saturday, Nov 28, 2015.

https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/flash-player/apsb15-28.html
says the current version is 19.0.0.245


> Be sure to set Flash cache to zero and run Ccleaner or Bleachbit
> periodically
> to remove the flash cookies.
> To be even safer make sure JS is OFF and stays OFF.

+1 for turning javascript off.  But way too many sites don't work if
JS is turned off.  It's kind of a pain getting the permissions set
right, but using noscript & request policy continued is the best
mitigation I've found for enabling JS.

Anyone have other suggestions for staying (relatively) safe with JS enabled?

Regards,
Lee
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[WaltS48]

On 11/28/2015 11:55 PM, Ed Mullen wrote:

David E. Ross wrote on 11/28/2015 7:51 PM:

On 11/28/2015 10:36 AM, Ed Mullen wrote:

David E. Ross wrote on 11/28/2015 1:10 PM:

On 11/28/2015 9:24 AM, DoctorBill wrote:

I read in several places that Flash Player is
dangerous as it can allow Viruses and Trojans
into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/

Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB



Many others claim Flash is indeed dangerous in that it allows malware
access to your computer.  Since security vulnerabilities in Flash are
not found as frequently as such vulnerabilities in various versions of
Windows, I do not worry about that.

However, I often find Flash to be annoying.  While I have Flash
installed, I also have the Flashblock extension installed and enabled.
For SeaMonkey, get Flashblock 1.3.20 (NOT 1.5.17) from
.



You don't really need Flashblock anymore.  Just set to "Always ask" in
the add-ons manager.




I am not sure, but I think that enabling Flash from an "Always ask"
setting will enable it for all the Flash on the current Web page.  Some
Web pages have more than one Flash.  Flashblock allows me to play the
one Flash I select without playing the others on the same page.



Never seen "Always ask" to fail. No experience with Flashblock as I work
to minimize installed extensions.





Well, each user is different. Some go to sites that when you allow Flash 
for the whole site, just to watch the video you are interested in, will 
play the little sport game snippet of the day, or an ad, or some other 
tiny video down the page that the user doesn't see.


That said, I don't use Flashblock and rarely encounter that situation.

On my local news site I do occasionally see the sports video playing on 
the home page with no sound.


--
Linux Mint 17.2 "Rafaela" | KDE 4.14.2 | Thunderbird 45.0a1 (Daily)
You don't need zero-days when machines wherever are packed with old-days.
Go Bucs! (next season) Go Pens! Go Sabres! Go Pitt!
[Visit Pittsburgh]
[Coexist · Understanding Across Divides]

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[Ed Mullen]

David E. Ross wrote on 11/28/2015 1:10 PM:

On 11/28/2015 9:24 AM, DoctorBill wrote:

I read in several places that Flash Player is
dangerous as it can allow Viruses and Trojans
into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/

Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB



Many others claim Flash is indeed dangerous in that it allows malware
access to your computer.  Since security vulnerabilities in Flash are
not found as frequently as such vulnerabilities in various versions of
Windows, I do not worry about that.

However, I often find Flash to be annoying.  While I have Flash
installed, I also have the Flashblock extension installed and enabled.
For SeaMonkey, get Flashblock 1.3.20 (NOT 1.5.17) from
.



You don't really need Flashblock anymore.  Just set to "Always ask" in 
the add-ons manager.



--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
Half the people you know are below average.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[Ed Mullen]

DoctorBill wrote on 11/28/2015 1:12 PM:

Ed Mullen wrote:

DoctorBill wrote on 11/28/2015 12:24 PM:

I read in several places that Flash Player is
dangerous as it can allow
Viruses and Trojans
into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/


Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB


That is not Flash Player.  It's an extension
specifically designed to force You Tube to deliver
videos using Flash rather than HTML5.

If you need the Flash Player/plugin go
download/install it from:



Remember to UNcheck the McAfee Optional offer.



OKI read about that, but don't understand Flash from HTML5 (or a
hole in the ground!).

I just ran https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sp0BjFl-a1Y and right clicked
it.
A menu says 'about HTML5 player' at the bottom.
So I have an HTML5 resident player ?
Where did THAT come from !?



The HTML5 spec includes playing videos natively, no plugins/extensions 
needed.  So, any browser that supports HTML5 will handle it.



I get many web sites that have a big brown (?) square and a message that
says I need to download a player.  Of course I don't click on the
download link - fishing for me to download a Trojan or Maleware ?



Depends on the site.  And the player it wants you to DL.


Somehow YouTube now works?  I have no idea why, since I did not download
anything to play it - I THINK !



At some point you updated to a SeaMonkey version that included HTML5 
video capability.



I am guessing that I do not have any control over what SM is doing !


Depends on what you want to control.


--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[Ed Mullen]

Paul in Houston, TX wrote on 11/28/2015 1:34 PM:

DoctorBill wrote:

I read in several places that Flash Player is dangerous as it can
allow Viruses and Trojans
into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/

Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB


Everything is dangerous to some extent.  I know that Flash works good
with XP3.
If you use Flash, be sure to install the latest version.
It is 19.0.0.226 for Windows as of Saturday, Nov 28, 2015.
Be sure to set Flash cache to zero and run Ccleaner or Bleachbit
periodically
to remove the flash cookies.
To be even safer make sure JS is OFF and stays OFF.



Doing that will break an awful lot of valid sites that require 
javascript to function.  Bank of America comes to mind.



--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
Half the people you know are below average.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[EE]

Ed Mullen wrote:

DoctorBill wrote on 11/28/2015 12:24 PM:

I read in several places that Flash Player is dangerous as it can allow
Viruses and Trojans
into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/

Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB


That is not Flash Player.  It's an extension specifically designed to
force You Tube to deliver videos using Flash rather than HTML5.

If you need the Flash Player/plugin go download/install it from:



Remember to UNcheck the McAfee Optional offer.


A better place to get the Flash player is here:
https://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/distribution3.html

There is no extra crap dumped on you from that page.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[David E. Ross]

On 11/28/2015 9:24 AM, DoctorBill wrote:
> I read in several places that Flash Player is 
> dangerous as it can allow Viruses and Trojans
> into your system.
> I went to Mozilla.org then this;
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/
> 
> Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
> Please eschew comments on XP !
> 
> Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
> Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?
> 
> Danke, danke.
> 
> DB
> 

Many others claim Flash is indeed dangerous in that it allows malware
access to your computer.  Since security vulnerabilities in Flash are
not found as frequently as such vulnerabilities in various versions of
Windows, I do not worry about that.

However, I often find Flash to be annoying.  While I have Flash
installed, I also have the Flashblock extension installed and enabled.
For SeaMonkey, get Flashblock 1.3.20 (NOT 1.5.17) from
.

-- 
David E. Ross

The Crimea is Putin's Sudetenland.
The Ukraine will be Putin's Czechoslovakia.
See .
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[DoctorBill]

EE wrote:

Ed Mullen wrote:

DoctorBill wrote on 11/28/2015 12:24 PM:

I read in several places that Flash Player is
dangerous as it can allow
Viruses and Trojans
into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/


Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB


That is not Flash Player.  It's an extension
specifically designed to
force You Tube to deliver videos using Flash
rather than HTML5.

If you need the Flash Player/plugin go
download/install it from:



Remember to UNcheck the McAfee Optional offer.


A better place to get the Flash player is here:
https://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/distribution3.html


There is no extra crap dumped on you from that page.



As someone who knows about these things, would YOU 
recommend that Mozilla Flash Extension over using 
the (now resident?) HTML5 player.


Sometimes (not always) YouTube Videos (especially 
music ones) are choppy and have pauses, etc.


Would I NOT have that with the Mozilla Extension ?


___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[Ed Mullen]

DoctorBill wrote on 11/28/2015 12:24 PM:

I read in several places that Flash Player is dangerous as it can allow
Viruses and Trojans
into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/

Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB


That is not Flash Player.  It's an extension specifically designed to 
force You Tube to deliver videos using Flash rather than HTML5.


If you need the Flash Player/plugin go download/install it from:



Remember to UNcheck the McAfee Optional offer.

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
"The nice thing about Standards is there are so many to choose from." - 
Michael Santovec

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[DoctorBill]

Ed Mullen wrote:

DoctorBill wrote on 11/28/2015 12:24 PM:

I read in several places that Flash Player is
dangerous as it can allow
Viruses and Trojans
into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/


Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB


That is not Flash Player.  It's an extension
specifically designed to force You Tube to deliver
videos using Flash rather than HTML5.

If you need the Flash Player/plugin go
download/install it from:



Remember to UNcheck the McAfee Optional offer.



OKI read about that, but don't understand 
Flash from HTML5 (or a hole in the ground!).


I just ran 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sp0BjFl-a1Y and 
right clicked it.

A menu says 'about HTML5 player' at the bottom.
So I have an HTML5 resident player ?
Where did THAT come from !?

I get many web sites that have a big brown (?) 
square and a message that says I need to download 
a player.  Of course I don't click on the download 
link - fishing for me to download a Trojan or 
Maleware ?


Somehow YouTube now works?  I have no idea why, 
since I did not download anything to play it - I 
THINK !


I am guessing that I do not have any control over 
what SM is doing !


DB




___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[DoctorBill]

I read in several places that Flash Player is 
dangerous as it can allow Viruses and Trojans

into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/

Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[DoctorBill]

DoctorBill wrote:

EE wrote:

Ed Mullen wrote:

DoctorBill wrote on 11/28/2015 12:24 PM:

I read in several places that Flash Player is
dangerous as it can allow
Viruses and Trojans
into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/



Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB


That is not Flash Player.  It's an extension
specifically designed to
force You Tube to deliver videos using Flash
rather than HTML5.

If you need the Flash Player/plugin go
download/install it from:



Remember to UNcheck the McAfee Optional offer.


A better place to get the Flash player is here:
https://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/distribution3.html



There is no extra crap dumped on you from that
page.



As someone who knows about these things, would YOU
recommend that Mozilla Flash Extension over using
the (now resident?) HTML5 player.

Sometimes (not always) YouTube Videos (especially
music ones) are choppy and have pauses, etc.

Would I NOT have that with the Mozilla Extension ?


Moot point anyway.says it is not compatible 
with my SM version 2.33.1.Merde !

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[Paul in Houston, TX]

DoctorBill wrote:

I read in several places that Flash Player is dangerous as it can allow Viruses 
and Trojans
into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/

Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB


Everything is dangerous to some extent.  I know that Flash works good with XP3.
If you use Flash, be sure to install the latest version.
It is 19.0.0.226 for Windows as of Saturday, Nov 28, 2015.
Be sure to set Flash cache to zero and run Ccleaner or Bleachbit periodically
to remove the flash cookies.
To be even safer make sure JS is OFF and stays OFF.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[Jonathan N. Little]

Ed Mullen wrote:

Doing that will break an awful lot of valid sites that require
javascript to function.  Bank of America comes to mind.


And any site that uses JS frameworks like Angular and JQuery and depend 
on Ajax, which is countless these days. We're back to the 90's again.


--
Take care,

Jonathan
---
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[David E. Ross]

On 11/28/2015 10:36 AM, Ed Mullen wrote:
> David E. Ross wrote on 11/28/2015 1:10 PM:
>> On 11/28/2015 9:24 AM, DoctorBill wrote:
>>> I read in several places that Flash Player is
>>> dangerous as it can allow Viruses and Trojans
>>> into your system.
>>> I went to Mozilla.org then this;
>>> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/
>>>
>>> Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
>>> Please eschew comments on XP !
>>>
>>> Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
>>> Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?
>>>
>>> Danke, danke.
>>>
>>> DB
>>>
>>
>> Many others claim Flash is indeed dangerous in that it allows malware
>> access to your computer.  Since security vulnerabilities in Flash are
>> not found as frequently as such vulnerabilities in various versions of
>> Windows, I do not worry about that.
>>
>> However, I often find Flash to be annoying.  While I have Flash
>> installed, I also have the Flashblock extension installed and enabled.
>> For SeaMonkey, get Flashblock 1.3.20 (NOT 1.5.17) from
>> .
>>
> 
> You don't really need Flashblock anymore.  Just set to "Always ask" in 
> the add-ons manager.
> 
> 

I am not sure, but I think that enabling Flash from an "Always ask"
setting will enable it for all the Flash on the current Web page.  Some
Web pages have more than one Flash.  Flashblock allows me to play the
one Flash I select without playing the others on the same page.

-- 
David E. Ross

The Crimea is Putin's Sudetenland.
The Ukraine will be Putin's Czechoslovakia.
See .
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is 'Flash Player' dangerous ?

[Ed Mullen]

David E. Ross wrote on 11/28/2015 7:51 PM:

On 11/28/2015 10:36 AM, Ed Mullen wrote:

David E. Ross wrote on 11/28/2015 1:10 PM:

On 11/28/2015 9:24 AM, DoctorBill wrote:

I read in several places that Flash Player is
dangerous as it can allow Viruses and Trojans
into your system.
I went to Mozilla.org then this;
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-flash-player/

Is this safe to use on SM 2.33.1 ?  Using XP.
Please eschew comments on XP !

Why do all these say they are for YouTube ?
Do they work only on YouTube and nothing else ?

Danke, danke.

DB



Many others claim Flash is indeed dangerous in that it allows malware
access to your computer.  Since security vulnerabilities in Flash are
not found as frequently as such vulnerabilities in various versions of
Windows, I do not worry about that.

However, I often find Flash to be annoying.  While I have Flash
installed, I also have the Flashblock extension installed and enabled.
For SeaMonkey, get Flashblock 1.3.20 (NOT 1.5.17) from
.



You don't really need Flashblock anymore.  Just set to "Always ask" in
the add-ons manager.




I am not sure, but I think that enabling Flash from an "Always ask"
setting will enable it for all the Flash on the current Web page.  Some
Web pages have more than one Flash.  Flashblock allows me to play the
one Flash I select without playing the others on the same page.



Never seen "Always ask" to fail. No experience with Flashblock as I work 
to minimize installed extensions.



--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
Why do we play in recitals and recite in plays?
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey