Re: Non-Adobe flash player for Firefox?

Re: Non-Adobe flash player for Firefox?

Secure Home | Search | About
 General Computer Security    Post an article   get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content add this group's latest topics to your Google content
Subject Author Date
Re: Non-Adobe flash player for Firefox? The Ghost In The Machine 08-21-2007
Posted by The Ghost In The Machine on August 21, 2007, 1:02 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, plenty560@yahoo.com
wrote
on Mon, 20 Aug 2007 18:49:55 -0700
> Hi all,
>
> I'm trying to rid my Linux installation of all potential corporate
> spyware, seeing as how (A) the companies may be up to no good
> for their own purposes and (B) they companies' software may be
> conduits for the US government, to allow the Feds to spy
> on Linux users. Now that spying is apparently the Feds' #1 priority
> (and that of the Democratic whores in Congress) I have to
> take this a little more seriously.

That it is, and the NSA has SElinux to facilitate its spying.
At least, we think it facilitates its spying. I can't tell
for sure from here, and in any event its patches are now
part of every Linux kernel and hopefully someone's reviewed
them by now.

Of course Vista is perfectly secure, right? :-)

>
> My present goal is to avoid the use of Adobe flash plug-in.
> I think I saw that there is a free flash compiler out there,
> but anybody know if there is a free player?

Gnash is out there. I'm not sure how well it works; the
games I've tested it on universally fail. Might work on
very simple stuff.

>
> If not, perhaps one safe thing I can think of to do is to only
> run Firefox (Windows version) in Wine, which I assume can't peruse
> my system without someone writing a virus specifically to
> attack Wine.

Wine emulates (or does not emulate -- well, anyway,
it's a long story on what precisely it does) Windows well
enough to allow viruses to affect the environment within
which Wine runs, which can be controlled to some extent
by fiddling with the symlinks in the .wine subdirectory.
One can (and probably should) also run winecfg.

> If I run the Linux version of Firefox with the
> plug-in, presumably that gives them a back door into
> my entire system.

Not clear at this time. I would be of the opinion that
the only thing an infected Firefox can destroy is one's
home directory; however, that depends on how deeply NSA
bugs are buried into the Linux kernel.

>
> Or, perhaps I can just create a new user & group for
> flash-enabled web browsing that can't access anything
> else on my system and put the plug-ins in ~/.mozilla.
> Hmm, I think I just solved my problem.
>

For now.

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
GNU and improved.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


Posted by Nico on August 21, 2007, 5:44 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
On 21 Aug, 06:02, The Ghost In The Machine
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, plenty...@yahoo.com

> > Or, perhaps I can just create a new user & group for
> > flash-enabled web browsing that can't access anything
> > else on my system and put the plug-ins in ~/.mozilla.
> > Hmm, I think I just solved my problem.
>
> For now.

Such virtualizaton and access control is what virtual hosts (such as
Xen guest domains) and the more fascinating settings of the Apache
suexec tools are for.


Posted by xpyttl on August 21, 2007, 9:33 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options

> On 21 Aug, 06:02, The Ghost In The Machine
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, plenty...@yahoo.com
>
>> > Or, perhaps I can just create a new user & group for
>> > flash-enabled web browsing that can't access anything
>> > else on my system and put the plug-ins in ~/.mozilla.
>> > Hmm, I think I just solved my problem.
>>
>> For now.
>
> Such virtualizaton and access control is what virtual hosts (such as
> Xen guest domains) and the more fascinating settings of the Apache
> suexec tools are for.

qemu seems to be a little lighter-weight way to do that, and seems ideally
suited to this problem.

..



Posted by The Ghost In The Machine on August 21, 2007, 9:59 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Nico
wrote
on Tue, 21 Aug 2007 02:44:37 -0700
> On 21 Aug, 06:02, The Ghost In The Machine
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, plenty...@yahoo.com
>
>> > Or, perhaps I can just create a new user & group for
>> > flash-enabled web browsing that can't access anything
>> > else on my system and put the plug-ins in ~/.mozilla.
>> > Hmm, I think I just solved my problem.
>>
>> For now.
>
> Such virtualizaton and access control is what virtual hosts (such as
> Xen guest domains) and the more fascinating settings of the Apache
> suexec tools are for.
>

Perhaps, although the OP was concerned with the user
agent side (browsers, in other words). To be sure, IBM
was doing virtual hosts when I was in college -- and that
was awhile ago. For them, Linux is a natural. :-)

(To be pedantic: any machine past the 80186 had "virtual
machine" capability anyway; the kernel is called via a
privileged opcode. In the case of the x86, that's INT.)

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
"Woman? What woman?"

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


Posted by Hans-Peter Diettrich on August 21, 2007, 5:02 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

> (To be pedantic: any machine past the 80186 had "virtual
> machine" capability anyway; the kernel is called via a
> privileged opcode. In the case of the x86, that's INT.)

To be more pedantic:

A VM must not have access to other processes and physical devices,
therefore memory management and reentrant instructions
(interruptable/resumable on microcode level) are further requirements
for true virtual machines. No problem nowadays, every OS needs and uses
such features for process isolation and memory management.

DoDi

Similar ThreadsPosted
Re: Non-Adobe flash player for Firefox? August 20, 2007, 10:52 pm
Re: Non-Adobe flash player for Firefox? August 21, 2007, 6:37 am
Want to find a file encryption solution on USB flash drive June 28, 2007, 9:42 am
A look at Firefox 2.0 RC2 October 9, 2006, 9:54 pm
Firefox and Window Washer November 26, 2004, 8:34 am
Spybot S&D can't see my Firefox cookies December 17, 2004, 10:10 pm
the favourities file of Firefox December 21, 2004, 4:39 pm
Where does Firefox store it's bookmarks? March 26, 2005, 6:25 pm
The Pros and Cons of Firefox April 20, 2005, 5:52 pm
New Firefox Version Avariable July 13, 2005, 5:31 pm

The site map in XML format XML site map

Contact Us | Privacy Policy