Chrome 76 is here: Flash blocked by default, incognito mode can't be detected

[midian182]

Why it matters: Google has just released Chrome 76, bringing with it several new patches and features. Some of the most notable include websites now being unable to detect incognito mode, and Adobe Flash getting blocked by default.

Earlier this month, Google confirmed previous reports that it would be closing a “loophole” that allowed websites to detect if a Chrome user had incognito mode activated. This was achieved by checking for the presence of Chrome’s FileSystem API (Application Programming Interface), which is disabled to avoid leaving traces of any activity on a device. If a site received an error message, this indicated a private browsing session was taking place.

In Chrome 76, the FileSystem has been modified, so websites no longer receive the error message when trying to detect the API. It means sites that use metered paywalls will no longer be able to tell if incognito mode is being used to avoid limits placed on how many free articles can be read.

Shortcut: Download Chrome 76 for Windows, Mac and Linux

The other major change relates to Flash, which Google has been trying to get rid of for many years due to its security risks. While the plugin is disabled by default in Chrome 76, it can be activated by going to chrome://settings/content/flash, though Adobe did say it will stop updating and distributing Flash next year.

Additionally, Chrome 76 will make it easier to install Progressive Web Apps (PWAs) on the desktop, thanks to a new install button in the address bar. Providing a site meets PWA criteria, Chrome will automatically show the install icon.

As usual, the latest update also includes a slew of security fixes, which you can read about in detail here.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/81224-chrome-76-here-flash-blocked-default-incognito-mode.html

 

[VitalyT]

Incognito, my a$$. It is either VPN or nothing.

 

[Uncle Al]

But still NO SINGLE PLAYER mode ...... NO SALE!

 

[bratface]

I have a question that maybe you can answer? I have been getting the 'Aw Snap' errors since the 18th, always in Chrome (mostly in my gmail account, but on other sites too). I have a new computer (3 months old) that is completely updated, had the latest Chrome version. I uninstalled & reinstalled Chrome, but nothing seems to help. I don't have a problem when I use another browser (Edge, Brave), but I'm not fond of either because of the limitations (no decent ad blockers) layout, appearance, etc. Any ideas, fixes, etc.?

 

[PEnnn]

Among the new stuff, is this asinine "improvement": Google Chrome Hides WWW and HTTPS:// in the Address Bar Again. See link below.

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/ne...hides-www-and-https-in-the-address-bar-again/

 

[Catweazle]

Incognito, my a$$. It is either VPN or nothing.

They are two different things. Private browsing mode is only meant to prevent browsing history, cookies and other data from being saved onto the device you are using, not to hide your IP address from the sites you visit.

 

[koblongata]

An engine made in WebAssembly for Flash like vector graphics and animation would be cool.

 

[Markoni35]

An engine made in WebAssembly for Flash like vector graphics and animation would be cool.

You can use SWG for vector graphics. Soon everything will be in WebAssembly. I'm glad that suggestion I sent so many times towards the HTML and WEB supervision agencies are starting to take traction. I told them 15 years ago that Javascript is cr-ap (and HTML even bigger cr-ap). Finally, we may get rid of JS as the main language on the web.

Next, I expect those id-iots from the WEB/HTML consortium to dump HTML and replace it with a proper application description format. Web pages are something that belongs to museum. We need something that makes building apps simple. I told that to the imbe-ciles who are responsible for the web, but they didn't understand why would anyone want to change the current "fantastic" state.

Many years later, they figured it out. I guess it has became so obvious that even the short-sighted mor-ons like them could now see it. They now support WebAssembly, and Google is working on Polymer, but seems they still don't fully understand that HTML needs to incorporate LESS rather than MORE.

It's puzzling them why so many new HTML features don't work in web browsers. The answer is simple: Because there's too many of them hardcoded in the standard. That makes web browsers huge and hard to maintain. They need LESS, not more. Just the basic functionality. The rest can be added dynamically, with external libraries. Which would make web a lot more flexible. Faster in evolution. We know from evolutionary theory - whoever evolves faster is the winner. That's why mobile apps overrun web on the mobile devices, because proper dev systems evolve fast, while web evolves as fast as turtles.

Perfection is when there's nothing else to remove without losing the basic functionality, not when there's nothing to add. I guess in the next 50 years those "geniuses" might figure it out.

 

[koblongata]

You can use SWG for vector graphics. Soon everything will be in WebAssembly. I'm glad that suggestion I sent so many times towards the HTML and WEB supervision agencies are starting to take traction. I told them 15 years ago that Javascript is cr-ap (and HTML even bigger cr-ap). Finally, we may get rid of JS as the main language on the web.

Next, I expect those id-iots from the WEB/HTML consortium to dump HTML and replace it with a proper application description format. Web pages are something that belongs to museum. We need something that makes building apps simple. I told that to the imbe-ciles who are responsible for the web, but they didn't understand why would anyone want to change the current "fantastic" state.

Many years later, they figured it out. I guess it has became so obvious that even the short-sighted mor-ons like them could now see it. They now support WebAssembly, and Google is working on Polymer, but seems they still don't fully understand that HTML needs to incorporate LESS rather than MORE.

It's puzzling them why so many new HTML features don't work in web browsers. The answer is simple: Because there's too many of them hardcoded in the standard. That makes web browsers huge and hard to maintain. They need LESS, not more. Just the basic functionality. The rest can be added dynamically, with external libraries. Which would make web a lot more flexible. Faster in evolution. We know from evolutionary theory - whoever evolves faster is the winner. That's why mobile apps overrun web on the mobile devices, because proper dev systems evolve fast, while web evolves as fast as turtles.

Perfection is when there's nothing else to remove without losing the basic functionality, not when there's nothing to add. I guess in the next 50 years those "geniuses" might figure it out.

Haha, exactly, I was dreaming the other day about what if we have SWF as webpage container, since it’s vector based we will have automatically scalable content without messing it up like it would with text describer based HTML, and if you want you can turn the entire page into full blown application or game by just adding ActionScript to it; I think this would be a much preferred paradigm or the web, and yes I am hoping WebAssembly is going to bring this to reality, if there are more graphical, interactivity, network WebAssembly API libraries to come, it is going to be super fun and exciting; and a new age for the web.