Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Lawsuit Hits Companies Using 'Zombie' Flash Cookies

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the brains-for-a-filling dept.

Privacy 140

A privacy activist has filed a lawsuit targeting eight corporate users of Quantcast's "zombie" Flash cookies, in addition to Quantcast itself. The suit alleges that MTV, ESPN, MySpace, Hulu, ABC, Scribd, and others used Quancast's Flash-based cookies to recreate browser tracking cookies that users had taken the trouble to delete. "At issue is technology from Quantcast, also targeted in the lawsuit. Quantcast created Flash cookies that track users across the web, and used them to re-create traditional browser cookies that users deleted from their computers. These 'zombie' cookies came to light last year, after researchers at UC Berkeley documented deleted browser cookies returning to life. Quantcast quickly fixed the issue, calling it an unintended consequence of trying to measure web traffic accurately. ... The lawsuit (PDF)... asks the court to find that the practice violated eavesdropping and hacking laws, and that the practice of secretly tracking users also violated state and federal fair trade laws. The lawsuit alleges a 'pattern of covert online surveillance' and seeks status as a class action lawsuit."

cancel ×

140 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

primo (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33052812)

I hate how Slashdot uses zombie flash cookies to try to keep from getting what the Italians call il primo post.

Re:primo (1)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | more than 4 years ago | (#33054402)

Well, at least zombie flash cookies are better than zombie flesh cookies...I guess

And here I thought I must have been drunk. (2, Funny)

JDmetro (1745882) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052818)

And forgot to delete those cookies from that porn site I didn't go to.

Re:And here I thought I must have been drunk. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33052974)

I have some bad news for you: that wasn't actually a website. Your drunken memory has failed you. That was real life, and I was showering your grill with my warm ball chowder as I grunted like a bull.

Re:And here I thought I must have been drunk. (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053028)

I have more bad news. It is a website now.

Re:And here I thought I must have been drunk. (5, Funny)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053052)

What kind of fetish involves raping a man's barbecue?

Re:And here I thought I must have been drunk. (1)

nacturation (646836) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053132)

Damn, that's the funniest thing I've read in a month.

Re:And here I thought I must have been drunk. (0, Offtopic)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053826)

A post like that certainly deserves a karma boost.

Re:And here I thought I must have been drunk. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053224)

I stand over you
My cock gushes hot semen
White gold coats your face

Re:And here I thought I must have been drunk. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053270)

When I lay with you
I feel the law is broken
You are twelve years old

Re:And here I thought I must have been drunk. (3, Insightful)

Thing 1 (178996) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053446)

These haikus are not
Accurate though, because they
don't mention seasons!

Re:And here I thought I must have been drunk. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053626)

These haikus are not
Accurate though, because they
don't mention seasons!

I've had a few beers,
But I do not have mod points.
Fuck you, it's summer! :)

Winter Snowfall (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053670)

Your father unzips
Hot semen blankets your face
Like winter snowfall

(now that's how you write a Haiku, you other anonymous coward retards)

Re:And here I thought I must have been drunk. (1)

prionic6 (858109) | more than 4 years ago | (#33054058)

Doesn't it count
that the GP was reminiscent
of spring time?

Re:And here I thought I must have been drunk. (1)

KrimZon (912441) | more than 4 years ago | (#33054218)

Yes:

A proper haiku
Has to mention a season.
Nothing springs to mind :(

Re:And here I thought I must have been drunk. (1)

Dekker3D (989692) | more than 4 years ago | (#33054484)

i have read your post
and i see what you did there
fall down some stairs please

Re:And here I thought I must have been drunk. (0, Offtopic)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053958)

What kind of fetish involves raping a man's barbecue?

To me, that sounds pretty

(puts on sunglasses)

hot.

Yeaaah!

Re:And here I thought I must have been drunk. (1)

Smekarn (1623831) | more than 4 years ago | (#33054522)

At risk of having my e-peen shrunk to negative volume: I don't get it, but I wish I did.

Save games (1, Informative)

Dwedit (232252) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052822)

Flash Sharedobjects aren't the same as cookies. They are often used as save files for Flash games. Then we have badly behaving programs like CCleaner which aggressively try to delete them all until you notice that it's about to delete all your save files, and stop it before it wipes them away.

Re:Save games (3, Insightful)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053234)

CCleaner behaves badly? I beg to differ. CCleaner cleans trash. It ASKS you if you want to clean trash, then it TELLS you about the trash it finds, then ASKS again if you want to delete the trash.

Those who are to stupid to follow directions and/or to examine the results before taking out the trash deserve what they get.

As for those flash game files - big deal if all of them are deleted. The wife plays online flash games. Her files have been deleted by one or another privacy software. She logs back in to the site, and all her "important" saved stuff is loaded back onto her computer. Geez - that's a real burden isnt' it?

After the first time, she learned how to delete those super cookies without deleting the files she wanted saved.

Terrible learning curve, that. It took her all of 30 seconds of cussing and bitching, plus another 90 seconds of reading, and then ten more seconds to change the settings.

Meanwhile, Better Privacy routinely deletes all the asshattery of flash cookies that she didn't specifically authorize on her machine, and everyone is happy. Except the asshats, of course.

As for the lawsuit - yes, Super Cookies are a hack, and should be subject to hacking laws that are meant to protect the average user. Burn Quantcast for developing and using it, and burn everyone who has bought the damned thing. I don't care WHAT business you are in - you have no right to track people unless they specifically opt-in to a tracking program, with full knowledge and understanding of what they are doing.

Re:Save games (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053252)

SuperDuperCrapCleaner has found potential malware on your computer: NTOSKRNL Delete? y/n $

Re:Save games (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33054176)

SuperDuperCrapCleaner has found potential malware on your computer: NTOSKRNL Delete? y/n $

$ y
$ System liberation successful

Re:Save games (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 4 years ago | (#33054042)

Meanwhile, Better Privacy routinely deletes all the asshattery of flash cookies that she didn't specifically authorize on her machine, and everyone is happy. Except the asshats, of course.

This, folks, is the important bit. Better Privacy [mozilla.org] is as essential as adblock and flashblock.

Flash users (-1, Troll)

XanC (644172) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052828)

People who use proprietary plugins like Flash surely are asking for this kind of thing.

Re:Flash users (0)

radicalpi (1407259) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052838)

People who use proprietary plugins like Flash surely are asking for this kind of thing.

It's not like it's a common aspect of the web. Tracking and monitoring of users is ok if they're asking for it by using such things. While we're at it, let's just say that anyone using a browser to access the internet is asking for it. If they use the internet, they deserve to have their privacy infringed upon.

Re:Flash users (1)

B4light (1144317) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053150)

Ok, Agreed. No copyright laws either though. It's a free-for-all.

And the other big Flash problem... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33052840)

You can't change the !@#$%^& Flash settings on your own computer. You have to go to a Flash website. And you can't manage your flash cookies without going to some obscure website.

It would be the easiest programming thing in the world to let people manage all the Flash settings and cookies right on the computer (no internet).

But noooo... that isn't the way the snoopy Flash people want things to be.

BetterPrivacy plug-in (4, Informative)

sphealey (2855) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052986)

At least for the Flash cookies on Wintel, the BetterPrivacy plug-in seems to be doing a good job of deleting them for me.

sPh

Re:BetterPrivacy plug-in (4, Informative)

mlts (1038732) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053384)

+1 on BetterPrivacy. Install that as an add-on, and it works on Windows and OS X. No more worries about Flash shared objects because it can be set to zap them at very short time intervals, as well as when you open or close the browser.

Firefox + BetterPrivacy + AdBlock + NoScript probably do as much for keeping a Windows machine clear of malicious software as most AV programs.

Re:BetterPrivacy plug-in (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053630)

You know it's useful tidbits like that that are the REASON that I keep reading /.

Thanx

Now if you'll excuse me I have to restart firefox to get my newly installed extension working.

Re:BetterPrivacy plug-in (1)

purpledinoz (573045) | more than 4 years ago | (#33054364)

I also use Cookie Monster for managing cookies. The only problem with NoScript is that it causes a lot of problems for people who aren't techies, like the date-picker not working, some submits not working, etc, since they don't know when to add a site to the white list. So I tend to install only AdBlock and BetterPrivacy for the non-techies.

Here is the shitty site (5, Informative)

psyclone (187154) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053010)

http://www.macromedia.com/support/documentation/en/flashplayer/help/settings_manager07.html [macromedia.com]

Noscript users must temporarily allow adobe.com as well. (But at least you don't need to allow real cookies for either domain.)

You can set the flash plugin to not store any data, but it sure gets annoying on some sites when the volume controls don't work. You can also set it to ask, but it's even more annoying to try and hit the "cancel" button 15 times with choppy video behind it.

Re:Here is the shitty site (5, Interesting)

Animats (122034) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053146)

Yes. If you tighten up the privacy controls enough on Flash, many video sites won't play, and some play badly. YouTube's player, for example, will display the "Press ESC to exit full screen mode" for the duration of play. There's absolutely no reason why that feature should depend on storing persistent information. It would be interesting to subpoena the developer and the documentation during development to determine if that was willfully put in to discourage users from using strict privacy settings.

Re:Here is the shitty site (1)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053616)

Adobe sucks. If I have one more company send me a form in PDF format I'm going to scream.

Re:Here is the shitty site (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053916)

You would prefer forms in Word instead? Or would you rather have them as TIFFs?

Re:Here is the shitty site (1)

6031769 (829845) | more than 4 years ago | (#33054282)

Standard-conformant XHTML 1.1 would be fine, thanks (and use less bandwidth, and be easier to fill in, and work on a character-cell terminal).

Re:Here is the shitty site (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33054172)

you would prefer they send Word documents?

Re:Here is the shitty site (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33054512)

Be happy. It is better than having to deal with different versions of word or powerpoint. At least you get a reader on any system and it also looks the same everywhere.

Re: one-liner to remove flash cookies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33054028)

Windows XP/Vista/7:

FOR %i IN (Adobe Macromedia) DO @RMDIR /S /Q "%APPDATA%\%i\Flash Player\" 2>NUL

Linux:

rm -rf ${HOME}/.{adobe,macromedia}/Flash_Player/

How ironic... (1, Flamebait)

SOULFLAYER (1865632) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052854)

Does anybody else see the irony in the -government- slapping the hands of businesses who -spy- on us?

Re:How ironic... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33052866)

Would you rather have the government do nothing for consistency's sake?

Re:How ironic... (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053076)

Does anybody else see the irony in the -government- slapping the hands of businesses who -spy- on us?

No but that's probably because if I spied on somebody the Gov't is who I imagine would bust me. Now if Google slapped the hands of businesses collecting data...

Re:How ironic... (1)

The_mad_linguist (1019680) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053256)

Not really. Monopolies always try to smack down their competitors.

On LInux: (1)

hkz (1266066) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052858)

sudo chown root::root ~yourusername/.adobe/Flash_Player
sudo chmod 0000 ~yourusername/.adobe/Flash_Player

Re:On LInux: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33052888)

~/.adobe/Flash_Player ?

Re:On LInux: (1)

hkz (1266066) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052928)

You're right, I mistakenly assumed that ~ would be aliased to /root when sudo'ing, but the shell expands the tilde, not sudo. So:

sudo chown root::root ~/.adobe/Flash_Player
sudo chmod 0000 ~/.adobe/Flash_Player

I did this and it sort of broke Flash for me on a lot of sites, so YMMV.

Re:On LInux: (1)

hkz (1266066) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052946)

Actually, my original command would have worked, but the above is cleaner.

Re:On LInux: (1)

stuckinphp (1598797) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053284)

Pretty sure AC was just a troll at the fact you have a directory called .adobe on a linux box.

Re:On LInux: (1)

radicalpi (1407259) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052930)

~/.adobe/Flash_Player ?

If you're running the command as root, you'll want to select your non-root account home directory.

Re:On LInux: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33052942)

No good.
rmdir ~yourusername/.adobe/Flash_Player
still works as an unprivileged user, even without write permission to that directory, because you have write permission to the parent directory.

Try setting the immutable bit:
sudo chattr +i ~/.adobe/Flash_Player
That will prevent even root from removing the directory, even if root has write permissions. root would first have to use chattr -i .

Re:On LInux: (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053038)

In my case there's nothing in .adobe/Flash_Player anyway, it's all in .macromedia/Flash_Player.

Re:On LInux: (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053030)

Better yet, use Apparmor or SELinux to stop it accessing anything it shouldn't access. When I created an Apparmor profile for Flash player I was amazed by all the places it tries to read from and write to.

Re:On LInux: (2, Interesting)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053072)

rm -rf ~/.adobe/Flash_Player/* ~/.macromedia/Flash_Player/*
ln -s /dev/null ~/.adobe/Flash_Player/AssetCache
ln -s /dev/null ~/.macromedia/Flash_Player/#SharedObjects
ln -s /dev/null ~/.macromedia/Flash_Player/macromedia.com

Or just get rid of Adobe Flash entirely.

Re:On LInux: (2, Informative)

izomiac (815208) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053166)

On Windows, in an elevated command prompt:
icacls "%APPDATA%\Macromedia\Flash Player" /setowner SYSTEM
icacls "%APPDATA%\Macromedia\Flash Player" /inheritance:r /deny everyone:F

Though I'd recommend a simple:
icacls "%APPDATA%\Macromedia\Flash Player" /inheritance:d /deny everyone:(WD,AD)

Not Quantcast's fault (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33052874)

Don't blame Quantcast. They're using the technology as Macromedia intended - to violate your privacy. That's what a Flash LSO does. Blame Macromedia, and now Adobe, for being so secretive about it. But, also blame yourself for not reading up on Flash before installing it, since this is well-documented behavior (just not on any Adobe website). Also, blame Microsoft for not telling you, since Flash comes with every version of Windows since at least XP.

Re:Not Quantcast's fault (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053080)

Don't blame Quantcast. They're using the technology as Macromedia intended

You logic is flawed. If I kill a human with a Samurai sword, would you blame the maker of the sword?

Flash comes with every version of Windows since at least XP

Do you mean Dell computers with Windows? Maybe, but no version of Windows ever came with Flash.

Re:Not Quantcast's fault (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053220)

Windows XP did. It's what they used to display the "Welcome to Windows XP" intro (the big one) when you installed it. But that was a while back.

Re:Not Quantcast's fault (3, Informative)

Tacvek (948259) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053838)

Actually this is not a troll. Take a look in the C:\windows\help\tours\mmtour folder of a new windows XP 32-bit installation and you will find that the tour is SWF based.

Among other dlls pre-installed on the system is a flash 3 or flash 4, or some similar early version dll (I forget the version or exact file name, but a search for 'flash' or 'swf' in file names on a brand new XP install (you might need to run the tour first to have it appear) should probably find it. I don't believe the browser plug-in ever came pre-installed, but the core DLL most definitely did.

Re:Not Quantcast's fault (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33054554)

look, its a troll if it contradicts the apple world view.

doesn't matter if its true or not (in this case it blatantly is true)

Re:Not Quantcast's fault (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053702)

I've had flash with windows 98 as a bundle and when i began to buy OEMs ala XP era, it came with Flash, Vista comes with flash, and windows 7 comes with flash. However they don't come with firefox or chome plugins of flash, at least the american version doesn't.

Flash is amazing when used right, but silverlight is capable of using the GPU a lot better than Flash does. HTML-5 will probably be ignored as a silverlight/flash alternative for now, but even that by itself is powerful.

For those saying that people are stupid for installing flash, you guys are the stupid ones. Seriously, it may have flaws but it does what it needs to do. Zombie Cookies be damned

Re:Not Quantcast's fault (2, Insightful)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053100)

Don't blame Quantcast

You're kidding, right?

Re:Not Quantcast's fault (2, Interesting)

dissy (172727) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053344)

Don't blame Quantcast. They're using the technology as Macromedia intended - to violate your privacy.

So, as you say they are purposely using software designed to violate your privacy. Why exactly shouldn't we blame them for that again?

Use better privacy (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33052882)

Use Better privacy [mozilla.org] .

I whitelist all the flash LSOs I want to keep, and have better privacy delete the others when I quit firefox.

Flashblock [mozilla.org] can also help.

I find noscript annoying.

I also accept all normal cookies for session only, and whitelist sites I want to stay logged in on using Cookie monster [mozilla.org] .

Re:Use better privacy (1)

muckracer (1204794) | more than 4 years ago | (#33054114)

> and have better privacy delete the others when I quit firefox.

I still can't believe, the Mozilla Devs removed the fabulous Clear History Popup window on exit. That was one of the best features of the browser, IMHO (friends and family agree)!!

(Yes, I know about askforsanitize...it works but looks very ugly.)

Zombie Flash Cookies (3, Funny)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052920)

Zombie Flash Cookies. I'm sure they're bad for you, but you have to admit they sound like they'd be tasty.

Re:Zombie Flash Cookies (1)

radicalpi (1407259) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052944)

In my mind, they're undead cookies that flash me. That doesn't sound appetizing at all. Plus, if I did eat them, they're not dead, they're in my stomach plotting on how to get to my brain and eat it.

Re:Zombie Flash Cookies (1)

Minwee (522556) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052968)

Keep in mind that these are different from naked female zombies [arstechnica.com] . We need to pass different laws for them.

Re:Zombie Flash Cookies (1)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052970)

And there's some aspect of this experience that doesn't sound both tasty and exhilarating?

Re:Zombie Flash Cookies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33054044)

they're undead cookies

So ... if undead people are people who died and had their corpse reanimated, is an undead cookie a partially digested, regurgitated, stomach-acid-soaked cookie?

Does that mean bird's feed zombie food to their young? Or that cows like to chew zombie grass?

Re:Zombie Flash Cookies (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33052950)

Fuck you and your shitty joke.

Re: (1)

SOULFLAYER (1865632) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052984)

Sounds like someone didn't get any zombie flash cookies for dessert tonight

Re:Zombie Flash Cookies (1)

Nikker (749551) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052998)

Kinda hit close to home huh?

Re:Zombie Flash Cookies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053020)

Have a cookie; you'll feel better.

Re:Zombie Flash Cookies (1)

lorg (578246) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053350)

Do they taste like chicken?

DMCA (1, Interesting)

giorgist (1208992) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052962)

Doesn't this fall under the unticircumvention law.
I protect my privacy
You circumvent it

Can we not use their own laws against them ?

Re:DMCA (1)

radicalpi (1407259) | more than 4 years ago | (#33052992)

Tattoo this to your forehead and go from there "© 2010 Me"

Re:DMCA (3, Insightful)

nacturation (646836) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053172)

If your theory holds, the French could sue the Germans under the DMCA for circumventing the Maginot line [wikipedia.org] . Here's a pro tip: there are some circumventions which have jack all to do with copyright law.

Re:DMCA (1)

muckracer (1204794) | more than 4 years ago | (#33054352)

> If your theory holds, the French could sue the Germans under the DMCA for circumventing the Maginot line.

Ohh...zis is a most wundervoll idea!! We will implement zis immediately!

Re:DMCA (0, Troll)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053222)

Except it isn't circumventing anything. If you are dumb enough to install Flash on your computer then you've given your permission. Uninstall Flash if you're so paranoid. Gawd knows Flash is a lot more of a danger to your computer experience than cookies are.

Re:DMCA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33054498)

ladies & gentlemen its mikeFM, the man with an apple shaped hole in his heart! here every day to support the noble apple cause!

watch and wonder as this pitiful creep demonstrates his devotion to steve jobs by taking his wrinkled pecker into his mouth once again, and going at it like there is no tomorrow!

on second thoughts you'd probably rather not =(

we don't need or want another apple shill here mike!
why don't ya fark orf ya miserable little creep!

aaaaaand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33052996)

adding *quantcast*(or something like that) to adblock plus. If it isn't there already.

browser and browser plugins failure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053014)

Its failure to allow plugins to circumvent cookie settings. It sucks that you have to use an addon like BetterPrivacy [mozilla.org] to delete flash cookies separately from regular cookies.

hopefully, eveyone buys a 40k chevy electric skate (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053238)

then we'll show 'em whois broke/in charge/still a hostage.

meanwhile (some of us are learning to walk again); the corepirate nazi illuminati is always hunting that patch of red on almost everyones' neck. if they cannot find yours (greed, fear ego etc...) then you can go starve. that's their (slippery/slimy) 'platform' now. see also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

never a better time to consult with/trust in our creators. the lights are coming up rapidly all over now. see you there?

greed, fear & ego (in any order) are unprecedented evile's primary weapons. those, along with deception & coercion, helps most of us remain (unwittingly?) dependent on its' life0cidal hired goons' agenda. most of our dwindling resources are being squandered on the 'wars', & continuation of the billionerrors stock markup FraUD/pyramid schemes. nobody ever mentions the real long term costs of those debacles in both life & any notion of prosperity for us, or our children. not to mention the abuse of the consciences of those of us who still have one, & the terminal damage to our atmosphere (see also: manufactured 'weather', hot etc...). see you on the other side of it? the lights are coming up all over now. the fairytail is winding down now. let your conscience be your guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. we now have some choices. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on your brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

"The current rate of extinction is around 10 to 100 times the usual background level, and has been elevated above the background level since the Pleistocene. The current extinction rate is more rapid than in any other extinction event in earth history, and 50% of species could be extinct by the end of this century. While the role of humans is unclear in the longer-term extinction pattern, it is clear that factors such as deforestation, habitat destruction, hunting, the introduction of non-native species, pollution and climate change have reduced biodiversity profoundly.' (wiki)

"I think the bottom line is, what kind of a world do you want to leave for your children," Andrew Smith, a professor in the Arizona State University School of Life Sciences, said in a telephone interview. "How impoverished we would be if we lost 25 percent of the world's mammals," said Smith, one of more than 100 co-authors of the report. "Within our lifetime hundreds of species could be lost as a result of our own actions, a frightening sign of what is happening to the ecosystems where they live," added Julia Marton-Lefevre, IUCN director general. "We must now set clear targets for the future to reverse this trend to ensure that our enduring legacy is not to wipe out many of our closest relatives."--

"The wealth of the universe is for me. Every thing is explicable and practical for me .... I am defeated all the time; yet to victory I am born." --emerson

no need to confuse 'religion' with being a spiritual being. our soul purpose here is to care for one another. failing that, we're simply passing through (excess baggage) being distracted/consumed by the guaranteed to fail illusionary trappings of man'kind'. & recently (about 10,000 years ago) it was determined that hoarding & excess by a few, resulted in negative consequences for all.

consult with/trust in your creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." )one does not need to agree whois in charge to grasp the notion that there may be some assistance available to us(

boeing, boeing, gone.

Lawsuit for *this*? (1)

epp_b (944299) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053278)

This isn't worthy of a lawsuit, this is worthy of a browser extension or plug-in, in-built browser function to manage flash cookies or simply an addition to the flash settings panel.

Oh, wait, this is the US... never mind.

Re:Lawsuit for *this*? (2, Insightful)

wealthychef (584778) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053332)

Yes, lawyers are interested in getting money. It's not about justice, or consumer rights, or privacy. It's about greedy lawyers always and forever.

Re:Lawsuit for *this*? (1)

mlts (1038732) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053440)

I agree with you though. This is a problem solved by a technological solution (BetterPrivacy, a shell script that runs and zaps the Flash directory, or something along those lines), than having it be litigated.

Litigation may even backfire, and a judge might rule that removing Flash cookies is considered circumventing DRM on Flash objects, and may make it even more difficult for utilities like BetterPrivacy or CCleaner to even exist.

Re:Lawsuit for *this*? (1)

jesset77 (759149) | more than 4 years ago | (#33054486)

Oh, fuck that. This is worthy of some serious competition to Adobe in the form of Flash Player Replacement [wikipedia.org] options. SVG and Canvas are nice and all, but there must be alternate ways to view the same content similar to competing web browsers for viewing the same HTML.

OS X can use this program to delete flash cookies (2, Informative)

qwertyatwork (668720) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053380)

OS X can use this program to delete flash cookies http://machacks.tv/2009/01/27/flushapp-flash-cookie-removal-tool-for-os-x/ [machacks.tv]

Re:OS X can use this program to delete flash cooki (3, Informative)

BearRanger (945122) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053622)

No program necessary to do this. Just remove ~/Library/Preferences/Macromedia/Flash Player/#SharedObjects. Set up a cron job or an Automator script to do it hourly.

Re:OS X can use this program to delete flash cooki (4, Funny)

qwertyatwork (668720) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053642)

Holy sudos, quick robin to the bat terminal!

deleted browser cookies returning to life? (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053408)

Could be interesting for a passive law enforcement tracking id?
You flush them out, they seem like ads?

habbo (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053682)

flash cookies are old news, at least as old as the habbo hotel raids

Why not sue Adobe??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053686)

Adobe create the platform that allows the violation in the 1st place. So why not sue them too??

Hello World, er Apple (4, Funny)

AnAdventurer (1548515) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053696)

Are we on Apple's side again for being anti-Flash? (I lose track so easily)

Re:Hello World, er Apple (1)

BearRanger (945122) | more than 4 years ago | (#33053914)

Well, this sort of thing is the reason why so many content providers are reluctant to move to HTML5 and away from Flash. When they talk about the additional capabilities that Flash has, this is what they mean. The ability to track your usage and gather information about you. (and the back room deals Adobe cuts along the way to deliver this data) Yet people clamor for Flash on their mobile phones.

Say what you will about Apple, in this case they're absolutely right. Perhaps not for the right reasons, but still. The enemy of my enemy is my friend and all that.

Re:Hello World, er Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33054078)

Personally I prefer installing FlashBlock or whatever add-on you prefer over not having Flash. Flash games, video players that work everywhere or apps that do things easily (e.g. upload files) are too convenient.

HTML5 is still far from usable in my opinion. All that codec and external program malarky is just bullshit. Plus HTML5 cannot do a lot of beneficial things that Flash can do.

Sure Flash has it's shortcomings and I'd prefer something more robust but it's the best (for the mass market of tiny in-browser-apps) current technology available for a lot of things; from a site visitor point of view.

Re:Hello World, er Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33054544)

hey good to have a neutral opinion on this - cheers for your contribution dude

oh wait, what? nice effort but you've been caught with jobs' wrinkled cock in your mouth too many times before. now fuck off you tiresome little shill.

say what you will about apple but if the ipad can keep boring creeps like you in a walled garden and away from the internet then its got to be a good thing right.

now get back to your tampod.

Re:Hello World, er Apple (3, Funny)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 4 years ago | (#33054268)

Are we on Apple's side again for being anti-Flash? (I lose track so easily)

It's now Wednesday, so yes.

Why aren't they suing adobe? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053806)

They are the ones that only allow you to delete the cookies by going to their site (adobe), so they know what all of the cookies are, and
that in of itself is a violation of privacy.

The best way to be safe from Flash cookies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33053996)

The best way to be safe from Flash cookies is to map their locations to RAM disk location. Here is a tutorial that shows how. Look for 'Using RAM disk with other software' section near the end of the page.

http://www.myplanetsoft.com/products/wt/intro/ramdisk/index.php

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>