Adobe Flash Player v11.4.402.287

Adobe Flash Player v11.4.402.287 - October 8, 2012

http://www.adobe.com/software/flash/about/

Download:
http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/

Note1: Uncheck any unwanted software offers during the install.
Note2: Release notes appear to be unavailable at this time

 

Thanks!

TH

 

Thanks for the heads up.

 

Thanks Prius.Seems Adobe been busy lately with Flash updates.

 

tnks

 

You are all quite welcome.

The release notes have been published since my OP. There are no new features in this release but the following issues have been fixed in this latest release (including AIR 3.4):

FIXED:

*Crashes when navigating to/from Flash content in Internet Explorer(3328165)

*Unable to package an application using an ANE on iOS, which doesn't not implement the finalizer function. (3325320)

*Packaging fails with null pointer exception, when packaging an IPA using only the default implementation in the ANE on iOS. (3325321)

*Database data is wiped out for every launch on iOS Simulator. (3329309)

*WIFi Debugging on iOS: Debugging on iOS does not work when network interface is chosen as Default for Player Target AIR3.4 (3325323)

 

Security updates available for Adobe Flash Player

http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb12-22.html

TH

 

Excellent! Thanks, TH.

 

Your very Welcome!

TH

 

Thanks guys

Just only as a side-note, don't confuse these:

11.4.402.287 (the new one)

11.4.402.278 (the older one)

 

*look at Windows Update history*

Yep, my flash has already auto updated, being built in is great. Feels like using Chrome again but with Microsoft's custom performance advantages.

 

They both have the same performance advantages by being run using the renderer. Or at least I assume that's how IE10 does it. If you have links that would be helpful.

http://blog.chromium.org/2012/08/the-road-to-safer-more-stable-and.html

 

What? No. It was announced when it was being built in. The only reason they are doing so is because they were given the source code to make it suck less [power].

 

Could you give a link? I believe you I just want to hear more about this.

 

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/...eb-sites-with-flash-content-in-windows-8.aspx

They also needed the source to get it working on ARM (RT).

There are other articles around that go deeper into it.

 

Thanks. That'll give me a place to start.

 

I can't find anything showing that source code was shared (I found a few things from 3rd party sites stating it without a source/ usually from dates before IE10 was out on Windows 8 ). I would normally just assume that they have some Microsoft engineers working with Adobe the way that Google does

edit: In fact it seems that, with some research, a rumor was started when a legitimate source was misquoted. ( http://www.withinwindows.com/2012/0...ernet-explorer-10-will-ship-with-adobe-flash/ ) And it looks to me like it's Microsoft sharing source with Adobe, not the other way around, which makes a lot of sense (I assume there's some source sharing on both ends or at elast restricted shared development teams) since both Chrome and Firefox had to work so closely with Adobe.

 

You can't make a modified version of flash without the source code, that's just illogical. Also what motivation would Adobe have to make a specially designed ARM version of flash that only works on a few websites when they already abandoned their entire Android development? Again, logic. Add to that the fact that it's actually signed by Microsoft.

It's obvious they have their own optimized branch of flash which gets security fixes from Adobe merged into it.

 

You can sign any file you want after it's compiled.

What I'm saying is it seems less likely that Adobe handed over their source code to Microsoft and more likely that a team of Microsoft employees is working with Adobe. Some IE source code was shared, some Flash code was shared but not to the entire company and not all of it.

I haven't seen anything indicating (from a legit source) that Adobe gave them *any* source code and only that Microsoft gave them source. I'm just assuming they did. Hopefully when Windows 8 is released there's more information here - I'm finding mostly rumors.

 

Microsoft sign something they haven't seen the code for? Maybe on a blue moon? I highly doubt any large company would risk attaching a "seal of approval" to what is essentially a package that could contain anything.

Adobe worked together with Microsoft or Adobe handed over source code, ok, now in what way does either change the fact that it's an optimized version of flash?

 

This is the multibillion dollar business of CAs.

I just don't think there are a lot of details as to what Microsoft is doing with Adobe yet since Windows 8 isn't out. While looking for more information on that it seemed to get clearer that Adobe didn't give them the source code so I brought that back here.

 

According to the info in the link below:

-http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/internet-explorer-10-embedded-flash-do-not-track-and-stable-standards/-

also:

-http://www.itwriting.com/blog/5815-adobe-flash-in-windows-8-metro-but-not-technically-a-plug-in.html/comment-page-1#comment-1264749-

 

That's pretty much what I figured. I'd think they shared (through a specific team) some relevant code at some point but not all of the code and only to that team. And the same for Microsoft - not all IE code but some.

 

I was nice of Adobe to release this patch prior to a Patch Tuesday.
http://blogs.adobe.com/psirt/2012/1...ailable-for-adobe-flash-player-apsb12-22.html

 

I talking about Microsoft, Google, Apple. Not CA's... whos job it is to just hand out certificates for money.

That source is a random commenter which may or may not be someone who works at Adobe, I'd take it with a grain of salt considering its entirely anonymous and you can type in any name or email address you want... I bring up logic once again: