4 ms·
A lot of advertising networks use it to deliver advertisements. Whether it is simple inertia at this point, or because the networks can get a better fingerprint
by archgoon 11y ago
A lot of advertising networks use it to deliver advertisements. Whether it is simple inertia at this point, or because the networks can get a better fingerprint using flash, I don't know.
Also, it used to be the case that Flash had better DRM controls on it, but I'm pretty sure that reason is no longer the case since Encrypted Media Extensions got rolled out.
However, that doesn't explain why Facebook's on-site video player uses Flash.
- shimfish 11y agoFacebook appears to have moved to an html player in the last few days.
- cpeterso 11y agoFacebook currently only supports HTML5 video for Windows 7+.
- hobarrera 11y agoNot for everyone, apparently. I'm still being prompted to install a plugin. Not only that, but images flagged as "gif" also prompt me to install flash (amazing how oddly these new features get implemented!).
- bydo 11y agoWhich is what makes these exploits so insidious: sneak an infected advertisement onto one network, even briefly, and you're now targeting who knows how many Internet users visiting legitimate, trusted websites. Honestly, one of the biggest reasons to run an ad blocker is the significantly reduced attack surface.
- ninkendo 11y agoThe advertising networks being the last to use it is something that will make Flash's implosion very quick and sudden, IMO. If uninstalling flash only causes you to miss out on ads, it makes uninstalling flash that much more attractive. Which makes the advertisers want to get off flash that much sooner. It needs probably just one or two more use cases to disappear (Facebook video is one of them), and its final death will be quite quick.