On 19 July 2010 09:18, Suvayu Ali <fatkasuvayu+linux@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Monday 19 July 2010 01:01 AM, Christofer C. Bell wrote: >>> Would you say use of noscript or flashblock would be a good compromise? >>> > If not what are my other options? (maybe I should start a new thread for >>> > this discussion) >>> > >> I think FlashBlock would be a fairly good compromise. If you're using >> FlashBlock, you can safely wander around the web knowing that no flash you >> do not explicitly authorize will be running. As for NoScript, I'm not sure >> that it adds value for this specific issue, but I certainly run it anyway >> (and not for security reasons). > > Thanks for your opinion Chris. Much appreciated. :) For what it's worth regarding flash 64 and because I've been meaning to post this for a while in case anyone runs into the same problem I did: I used to run the 64 bit flash because I'd had difficulty setting up nsplugin wrapper. However recently (after the 64bit alpha was discontinued) I found that I couldn't upload pictures to facebook. After lots of fiddling with Java I realised that Facebook had actually changed their uploader to flash and that it was the flash uploader that didn't work. I followed the directions at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Flash for installation on 64 bit FF11 (yes I know, will be upgrading that soon too) and Facebook is working properly now again. Additionally all the things I used flash for previously (mainly BBC radio, but I'm sure there's lots of other stuff I don't even notice) still work, so nsplugin setup seems to be pretty easy now (just a case of installing the right packages). -- imalone -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
