Too many zeros and threes.Īs for the Adobe tester page, my guess is that Adobe is a big bureaucracy and something fell through the cracks, so that the page was not updated.Īs for the Adobe security bulletin being wrong, my guess is that Adobe and Google crossed wires.

My guess is that Krebs made a typo, and that he meant to write 11.3.300.270. 11.3.330.270.' If you're keeping score at home, that's three different reports on the latest version of Flash for Chrome.Īnd, they are: wrong, wrong and wrong again.

He wrote that 'Chrome users want to be at v. As I write this, it's more than a day after the new version of Flash was released.īrian Krebs covers this stuff too, it was on his blog that I first learned of the Flash player upgrade. Likewise, it seems back dated for Linux users of Chrome, stating that version 11.2.202.236 is the latest and greatest. There, it says that for Chrome users on Windows and OS X the latest version of Flash is 11.3.300.265 (older than the security bulletin). Adobe has a Flash tester page (my term, not theirs) at /software/flash/about/ (see below). Linux users on version 11.2.202.236 and earlier should upgrade to version 11.2.202.238īut, it seems that the left hand at Adobe doesn't know what the right hand is doing. Likewise, Chrome users on OS X and Windows, running version 11.3.300.270 and earlier should also upgrade to version 11.3.300.271 Windows and Macintosh users running version 11.3.300.270 or earlier, should upgrade to 11.3.300.271 Yesterday was a big day for the Flash player, a new version was released that fixed a security bug. In the Security bulletin detailing the problem (APSB12-18), Adobe said This used to be considered a bad thing, now, that's not so clear. Sadly, the topic is now begging for someone to pull it all together.įirst off, anyone using an iOS device (iPhone, iPad) can go read another blog, there is no Flash for you. So, I was more than happy never to write about Flash again.

Shockwave vs adobe flash player