Comments on: Parent SWF Security Sandbox & Zinc

By: Peter Blazejewicz

Peter Blazejewicz — Thu, 30 Jun 2005 00:00:45 +0000

Hello Jesse,

yes, security restriction are still valid even if target movie is an .exe. It restricts if and how loaded movie can access parent movie functions and variables. Today we found that it also restrict how loaded movie can access local content with methods of XML/LoadVars objects (for loading eg. local text data from user machine),
It’s very easy to make loaded movie to follow current security restriction avaiable within .v7 of plugin and separate shell .exe from active content loaded from server,
That is a good news because you can build beatuful things that way (eg. modular application) and also bad ones: there is probably no easy way to disallow such things,
There are two related threads on ZINC PC users forum where remote content within desktop application was discussed,
I wonder if Mealstrom new I/O api will bring something new to that,

regards,
peter

By: Brent Bonet

Brent Bonet — Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:46:49 +0000

If I’m not mistaken Zinc is an exe wrapper for the ActiveX plugin which may be the reason you’re getting the behavior. Anyway, I’ve found the forums at multidmedia.com generally pretty helpful in the past.

Brentholio

By: JesterXL

JesterXL — Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:43:26 +0000

Kenny Bunch just told me that it’s using the ActiveX control, and since the ActiveX control respects the security sandbox, that’s why.

By: Tim Walling

Tim Walling — Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:37:05 +0000

Maybe Zinc is actually running the swf in a window that uses a plugin. This could be the way they get the extra window functionality. Here where I work we use IE as the container for our installed apps. You wouldn’t know it just be looking at it. We have apps that driven by dhtml and some that are in flash using fscommand to talk to the container window.