#Flash player plugin for firefox update#

But not every small company is willing to dedicate to run such an appliance. If you put such an appliance under such restrictions, then yes, its risks of harm remain better under control and better manageable. all NICs disabled and USB ports and the like not freely accessible.

And due to known vulnerabilities, such an appliance has to be outside of any computer network, e.g. I am talking on behalf of small companies who could not afford to migrate or change the system. So if such risks are not accepted nor acceptable, then such an approach doesn't fit and is harmful.Ī dedicated machine need to be put for that. Flash has always been known for security risks. That depends on the kind of application and its isolation.

#Flash player plugin for firefox update#

Yes to make one application run, there is no harm I guess and yes that particular windows update version needs to be uninstalled. Regaining the trust of your former users will be more challenging than just finishing your migration plans. So you knew that you transmitted the message to your former users that you had abandoned your service, support and application. Megaaz03 wrote:Any help would be appreciated.Īs announced by Adobe and others, the solution is to implement and finish your migration plans so that your users may regain trust that you're able to support them and your application.Īs far as I understood your post, you didn't succeed to finish your migration plans in time.

Which migration and porting plans did you establish after these announcements by Adobe and Microsoft? How far have you got in implementing these (yet undisclosed) plans? If so, Adobe and Microsoft have warned you early enough to allow you porting your solution to a different technology via early announcements of retirement plans. Sorry, I didn't get which service your application delivers and if that service is still in demand. Recently with the flash changes by adobe, our bespoke application stopped working