Flash component blocked even if the always allow option is on
Reported by
estebanp...@gmail.com,
Aug 23 2017
|
||||||
Issue descriptionUserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:55.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/55.0 Example URL: Steps to reproduce the problem: 1. Open a page with multiple flash player elements. 2. Google chrome blocks all components. 3. Click the blocked plugin icon in the URL bar and click run all plugins this time. What is the expected behavior? The plugins should run as expected. What went wrong? Nothing happens. All is blocked. Even if the page is in the whitelist to run flash player or if the flags related to flash are changed to always allow to run the component. Does it occur on multiple sites: Yes Is it a problem with a plugin? No Did this work before? N/A Does this work in other browsers? Yes Chrome version: 60.0.3112.101 (Official build) (64 bits) Channel: stable OS Version: Ubuntu 16.04 Flash Version: Shockwave Flash 26.0 r0
,
Aug 23 2017
I think I found a webpage where flash is not loaded even if flash player is installed and allowed: http://www.gapminder.org/world/
,
Aug 24 2017
Unable to reproduce this issue on Ubuntu 14.04 using chrome latest stable #60.0.3112.101. After opening the URL http://www.gapminder.org/world/ observed the plugins blocked for first time and later clicked on the plugin icon from top right corner of the omnibox and 'Run all Plugins this time'. Observed the flash content played as expected. Reporter@ Could you please recheck this issue by updating your Adobe flash player from chrome://components and let us know on which version the flash is running? Thanks!
,
Aug 24 2017
I'm using the latest flash player version: 26.0.0.151. I'll look for other webpage showing the same behaviour and I'll update this issue.
,
Aug 24 2017
Thank you for providing more feedback. Adding requester "brajkumar@chromium.org" to the cc list and removing "Needs-Feedback" label. For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot
,
Aug 25 2017
if it helps, this is what I see when I run the Google Chrome browser from terminal: [8056:8056:0825/081955.129619:ERROR:sandbox_linux.cc(344)] InitializeSandbox() called with multiple threads in process gpu-process. [7924:7958:0825/082022.056869:ERROR:service_manager.cc(142)] Connection InterfaceProviderSpec prevented service: content_plugin from binding interface: memory_instrumentation::mojom::Coordinator exposed by: content_browser [WARNING:flash/platform/pepper/pep_module.cpp(63)] SANDBOXED I'm using the latest Google Chrome version (60.0.3112.113-1) and plugin Adobe Flash Player - Versión: 26.0.0.151
,
Aug 25 2017
In this page ( http://www.mono-1.com/monoface/main.html ) you see sort of the same behaviour as reported, but the flash components are still working.
,
Aug 28 2017
,
Sep 6 2017
Same issue is prominent for the largest online community in China: tieba.baidu.com . It uses flash for showing replies message. Even if I select to allow all flash at the page information area. It still blocks flash for this message passing function. It makes the community very unpleasant for use. I have to click the Run Plugin button in address bar now and then to see replies to my threads.
,
Sep 6 2017
I' m on Windows 10 x64 and latest chrome 61. Many people in China experience this: http://tieba.baidu.com/p/5308739847 .
,
Sep 8 2017
I am experiencing the same issue on Version 61.0.3163.79 (Official Build) (64-bit) OS: Windows 7 I experienced the same issue few months back and was able to resolve it by doing the following steps. - Go on chrome://flags - search for "Prefer html over flash" - Put it on "Disabled"
,
Sep 9 2017
垃圾浏览器,v61就是败笔玩意,一大堆网站打不开,提示https被吊销,falsh也无法显示。
,
Sep 11 2017
,
Sep 11 2017
Thanks for the report. Independent of any preference/ setting, Chrome actively blocks all small (less than 300x400) form factor Flash content. The reason for this block is that class of content, representing ~90% of Flash impressions, was used predominantly for ads viewability detection (i.e., is the ad visible on the screen), which had significant performance implications, and persistent/ long lived cookies, which has implications to privacy. The work around, for site developers, would be to expand the content to be > 300x400. |
||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
||||||
Comment 1 by estebanp...@gmail.com
, Aug 23 201736.6 KB
36.6 KB View Download