Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday August 25 2019, @09:00PM   Printer-friendly
from the Flash-is-dead,-long-live-Ruffle! dept.

Games and animation site Newgrounds announced it is working on a way to play Flash content via emulation.
Ruffle is an open source Adobe Flash Player emulator written in Rust. It targets desktop and the web using Web Assembly, so unlike the plugin (which is scheduled for end-of-life in 2020), any security issues would be issues with the web browser itself.

While the creation of new Flash content instead of modern technology seems a Bad Idea, this Soylentil for one would be quite happy to replay some of the classics (which stopped working when the plugin was banned from his system).

[ Ed Note: the source article claims that open source is the reason why there won't be any vulnerabilities: "For anyone who is concerned about Flash's reputation for security - this project is entirely open source and any security issues would be issues with the web browser itself, whereas the traditional Flash plugin was a closed system that created unique opportunities for exploits." - Fnord666]


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by driverless on Monday August 26 2019, @05:41AM (2 children)

    by driverless (4770) on Monday August 26 2019, @05:41AM (#885532)

    Sure, but that's the same as the 360 assembly language argument, you can write buggy, insecure code in Javascript as well as any other language. In fact there's entire industries that churn out buggy, unsafe Javascript, and endless CVEs to accompany their work.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by Pino P on Monday August 26 2019, @02:58PM

    by Pino P (4721) on Monday August 26 2019, @02:58PM (#885659) Journal

    The difference is that should an escape be discovered in JavaScript or WebAssembly, the browser publisher has power to fix it in an update. If I recall correctly, the major browser publishers have a better record on sandboxing hygiene than Adobe ever did.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 26 2019, @03:49PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 26 2019, @03:49PM (#885683)

    The difference is that with this solution, there aren't any more browser exploits than there were without it. Since everything is JS/HTML5, any exploits could be done just as well without this tool as with it (by simply using the proper HTML5/JS directly.