After ignoring Linux for years, Adobe releases Flash 24 for Linux

Martin Brinkmann
Dec 18, 2016
Updated • Dec 18, 2016

Adobe has just released the first final Adobe Flash Player stable release, Flash Player 24, for GNU/Linux in years.

The company announced back in September 2016 that it would bring back Flash for Linux from the dead. This came as a surprise as it had ignored Linux for the most part when it comes to Flash.

Adobe promised back then that it would provide a Linux version of Adobe Flash Player that would be in sync with the company's regular Windows and Mac releases of Flash Player.

A beta release of Flash 23 was released at the time with the promise that a final version would be made available.

This beta version was only available through the Adobe Labs website. Once installed on a device running Linux, browsers like Firefox or Pale Moon would pick up the plugin automatically giving users options to run most Flash content on the Internet.

Most? Adobe stated back then that the Linux version of Flash Player would not support some features, GPU 3D acceleration and support for premium video DRM for instance. The company recommended the Chrome web browser and its integrated version of Linux for that as it does not have that limitations.

flash player 24 linux

If you point your web browser to the Adobe Flash Player download site, and there more precisely on the download site for "other versions", you will notice that Flash Player 24 Final for Linux is now provided as a download.

This is the same version that is offered for Windows and Mac operating systems as well. You can select 32-bit or 64-bit Linux from the menu, and pick one of the available versions afterwards.

The following versions are listed currently:

  • Flash Player 24 for Ubuntu (apt)
  • Flash Player 24 for Linux (YUM)
  • Flash Player 24 for Linux tar.gz both as PPAPI and NPAPI
  • Flash Player 24 for Linux rpm both for PPAPI and NPAPI

The release means that Adobe is offering the same Flash Player version for Windows, Mac and Linux once again.

The release comes at a time when browser makers such as Google, Mozilla and Microsoft are slowing phasing out support for plugins and thus also Flash.  The companies have or will set Flash to click to play to block Flash content from loading automatically. The next step would be to remove support for Flash altogether, but this will probably not happening in the next two or so years considering that there are still plenty of sites out there that require Flash to work properly.

After ignoring Linux for years, Adobe releases Flash 24 for Linux
Article Name
After ignoring Linux for years, Adobe releases Flash 24 for Linux
Adobe has just released the first final Adobe Flash Player stable release, Flash Player 24, for 32-bit and 64-bit GNU/Linux systems in years.
Ghacks Technology News

Previous Post: «
Next Post: «


  1. Ethan said on March 28, 2020 at 10:01 pm

    Adobe Flash Player is a widely used multimedia player for displaying Flash files for Internet Explorer. Adobe Flash Player is a plugin for Chromium where all versions can play Flash films, AOS, Firefox, Mozilla, Windows, Internet Explorer Nuns, and Opera browsers. Without this program, the browser will not properly display web pages and interactive web components that have developed Flash technology (SWF files).

  2. Owl said on December 21, 2016 at 3:29 am

    a different Martin: Bleachbit is cross platform. (and one place to do things). You can set it up to start with system if you want to. Remember, no registry in linux :) Very good addon for deleting LSO’s is Better Privacy, and Click & Clean Firefox addon is great. I’m not an expert, so someone else will have to chime in with HTML5. I also like Clear Cache addon and Bluehell Firewall FF addon:)

    1. A different Martin said on December 21, 2016 at 6:55 pm

      Thanks, Owl. I’ll look into BleachBit, keeping A or B, not C’s warning in mind. I used Better Privacy and Click & Clean for a while when Firefox was my primary, default browser, but I was going back and forth between Firefox and Pale Moon so much that I abandoned them for CCleaner. I had trouble with Bluhell Firewall and was too busy back then to spend time trying to figure out the problem, so I never gave it a fair trial. I guess these are things I might have to revisit in Linux.

  3. A different Martin said on December 21, 2016 at 2:24 am

    I’ve been trying out Linux Mint 18 / 18.1 in a virtual machine and very recently came across an article along the lines of “10 things you should do after you install Linux Mint 18.1.” One of the recommendations was to install a third-party Flash installer that keeps Flash up to date security-wise. I didn’t follow all 10 recommendations, but that one I did follow.

    I use CCleaner in Windows to clean out stuff like unwanted cookies, Flash cookies, and whatever the HTML5 equivalent is (sorry — the preferred term isn’t coming to mind), but I haven’t yet had time to look for an equivalent utility for Linux. I’d really prefer something that’s cross-application like CCleaner, so I can protect or zap tracking stuff for multiple browsers in a single operation. Any tips from Linux users?

    1. A or B, not C. said on December 21, 2016 at 7:00 am

      @ A different Martin ……. Fyi, cookies r usually cleared thru the browser settings, n not by 3rd-party programs like CCleaner. Linux systems do not require Disk Cleanup n Defrag. Only Windows systems require Disk Cleanup n Defrag.
      Adobe stopped supporting Linux in 2012 bc of Linux’s minuscule market share of about 2% = Flash Player for the Firefox browser stuck at Version 11 but continued to receive security updates thru Linux Update Manager. But the Chrome browser was not affected bc Flash Player has been integrated into the browser = Pepper Flash or PPAPI. Affected Firefox users could do a workaround by installing Chrome’s Pepper Flash, in order to use the latest Version of Flash Player. I believe that’s what the 3rd-party Flash Installer does for the Firefox browser in Linux Mint 18/18.1.
      ……. Similarly, in March 2016, Google has stopped support for the Chrome browser in 32bit Linux systems = affected users can install the Slimjet browser. Today, Linux 32bit n Win XP/Vista can no longer install Chrome.
      P S – There r some doubts about the usefulness of Bleachbit for Linux systems. Beware.

      1. A different Martin said on December 21, 2016 at 6:46 pm

        Thanks for your reply, A or B, not C. I have a preferred browser (Pale Moon), but when I run into a site or page that just won’t run in Pale Moon, I try Firefox, and if that doesn’t work, Google Chrome, and if that doesn’t work, Internet Explorer. That’s why I appreciate being able to protect/delete tracking objects left behind by multiple browsers with a single application/operation rather than browser by browser. It speeds up and simplifies housekeeping. But if I can no longer reliably do that in Linux, it’s not the end of the world, just a minor hassle.

  4. Jonathan said on December 20, 2016 at 10:29 pm

    “…support for premium video DRM for instance. The company recommended the Chrome web browser and its integrated version of Linux for that as it does not have that limitations.”

    The Linux version of Chrome does NOT support DRM, as I know having spent a considerable amount of time trying to make My5 (catch up for a British TV station) work. Linux is the only platform on which Chrome does not support DRM (and I do mean Chrome, not Chromium). The only solutions for Flash+DRM on Linux are Pipelight or running a Windows browser under Wine. I can’t get either to work without significant A-V sync and other issues.

    1. A or B, not C. said on December 21, 2016 at 8:20 am

      @ Jonathan ……. I think Chrome for Linux does support DRM. Yr problem with My5 is likely bc of geo-blocking, ie only UK IP addresses are allowed to stream videos at My5. Similarly for BBC’s iPlayer website. To bypass geo-blocking, u need to use a VPN or proxy-server program, eg Proxmate, Zenmate n Hola Better Internet(from holadotorg).
      U can also get DRM support in Linux Mint by running Firefox for Windows thru Wine.

      1. A or B, not C. said on December 22, 2016 at 1:59 pm

        @ Jonathan ……. Maybe, it has something to do with the fact that Adobe had ceased support of their Flash Player(FP) for Linux in 2012. This resulted in the FP plugin in Firefox for Linux to be stuck at Version 11 since 2012. Chrome for Linux was not affected bc Google integrated FP into their Chrome browser via PPAPI = always updated to the latest Version of FP.
        ……. When Netflix took off at around 2014, Google immediately implemented DRM support in Chrome for both Windows n Linux. Firefox for Windows only implemented DRM support in early 2016. Firefox for Linux still does not hv DRM support, even though Adobe has just resumed supporting Linux for their FP = Firefox for Linux can be updated to FP Version 24.
        ……. B4 2014, Netflix DRM-protected videos could only be accessed with M$’s Silverlight plugin for Internet Explorer = Netflix used M$’s Playready DRM technology.
        I think both Chrome n Firefox for Windows support the 3 major DRM technology, ie Google Widevine, Adobe Primetime/Flash DRM n M$ Playready.
        Likely, the HAL workaround in Firefox for Linux to watch DRM-protected videos at Hulu n My5, only works in FP Version 11, n not FP Version 24. This may be due to the peculiarity of the websites wrt DRM technology.
        ……. Also, some websites hv stopped supporting the old FP Version 11 in Firefox for Linux = can’t watch their Flash videos.
        Bear in mind that certain browser settings will deactivate DRM support, eg not accepting cookies, incognito browsing, disabling of private identifier, ‘do not track’ setting, deletion of DRM license, etc.
        DRM support wrt browsers n OS, can be confusing.

      2. Jonathan said on December 21, 2016 at 10:37 pm

        @A or B, not C: Google Chrome on Linux does not support Flash DRM. I’m not talking about HTML5 DRM / EME. Perhaps I could have been clearer that I’m talking about Flash DRM, although I thought this thread was about Flash.

        Google Chrome on Linux does not support Flash DRM. I’ve just tested it using these instructions (on an otherwise out-of-date page – you can no longer use DRM in Flash by installing HAL):

        In Firefox on Windows, I see the video of the steam train.
        In Firefox on Linux with Flash 24, it doesn’t play.
        In Chrome on Linux with built-in Flash, it doesn’t play.

        It’s great if Firefox on Linux will include EME so that people can watch services such as Netflix that they’ve paid for. However, it won’t help with Flash-based sites such as My5. These can not currently be watched natively on Linux.

        It used to be that Flash on Linux supported DRM via HAL. All the catch-up TV sites in the UK worked, including Channels 4 and 5. That was the beauty of Flash: if it worked on Windows, it would pretty much be guaranteed to work on Linux as the Flash plugin was available for both. I didn’t matter if the creators of the site chose not to support Linux specifically.

        Adobe’s decision to leave DRM out of Flash for Linux means Linux users can not use sites that rely on Flash DRM until the sites finally upgrade to HTML5.

      3. A or B, not C. said on December 21, 2016 at 2:53 pm

        @ Jonathan ……. According to this link …
        https(semicolon)//www(dot)linuxformat(dot)com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=17203 ….
        ……. it may be that the video-streaming software at the My5 website does not support Linux bc of Linux’s minuscule market share of 2%. IOW, yr problem likely has nothing to do with Chrome for Linux not supporting DRM, which is not true.

      4. A or B, not C. said on December 21, 2016 at 2:29 pm

        @ Jonathan ……. Pls refer to these links, dated Feb 2016 n Aug 2016 respectively …
        Chrome n Firefox for Linux do support DRM, esp Chrome for watching Netflix n Amazon Video.
        ……. It is only that certain websites that implement Adobe Flash DRM will require the complicated HAL workaround in Firefox to play the DRM-protected videos.

        To protect their videos, subscription video-streaming websites can pay to use DRM technology from different vendors, ie Adobe Primetime DRM., DivX Plus., Google Widevine., Marlin DRM., OMA CMLA-OMA v2. n Microsoft PlayReady..
        ……. Presently, Google Widevine n Adobe Primetime/Flash DRM r more popular.

      5. Jonathan said on December 21, 2016 at 11:41 am

        No it doesn’t support DRM:
        “In case you were ready to swallow your pride and to switch to Chrome for that particular reason, think again though… the only Linux platform they include DRM support for is Android”

        I live in the UK and can watch My5 on a Windows browser and can also watch BBC iPlayer and ITVPlayer natively, neither of which uses DRM. As I said, using Wine gives A-V sync issues.

        Even so, I’m glad Flash is being supported again to some extent on Linux. While in an ideal world I’d prefer to stick to HTML5, there are still plenty of video sites that require it.

  5. Ben L said on December 20, 2016 at 8:37 pm

    Behold! The field in which I grow mine fvcks! for it is barren!

  6. Maou said on December 19, 2016 at 10:25 pm

    Nope, you can keep your dying Malware to yourself Adobe!
    Why do they insist on beating the dead horse?

    1. Ben L said on December 20, 2016 at 8:38 pm

      Because they don’t know the horse is dead and that it was a lack of a decent bundle of developers that killed it.

  7. AC said on December 19, 2016 at 6:57 pm

    I had no idea that people still used Flash, except as a reference point for incompetence and failure.

  8. Jimmy James said on December 19, 2016 at 12:07 pm

    lol nope

  9. jern said on December 18, 2016 at 11:04 pm

    Why Flash for Linux? I’m betting its because of this…
    Like the HTTP cookie, a flash cookie (also known as a “Local Shared Object”) can be used to save application data. Flash cookies are not shared across domains. An August 2009 study by the Ashkan Soltani and a team of researchers at UC Berkeley found that 50% of websites using Flash were also employing flash cookies, yet privacy policies rarely disclosed them, and user controls for privacy preferences were lacking.

    How much money can be made with personal data?
    Local shared objects can be used by web sites to collect information on how people navigate them, although users have taken steps to restrict data collection. Online banks, merchants, or advertisers may use local shared objects for tracking purposes.

    Adobe is probably responding to the demand of customers who want Linux user data. Linux users spend money just like everybody else and I’m sure Adobe’s customers want a share of it. I believe flash cookies have an .swf suffix.

    1. Jerk said on December 19, 2016 at 12:51 pm


      Another victim of the dreaded confirmation bias. To your credit, it’s pretty amazing that you can come up with such a lame analysis, you have me kind of floored right now.

      By the way, Flash LSO have been outdone by HTML5’s various kinds of storage for a long, long time now, so according to your amazing reading of the situation there’s actually no reason for Adobe to get Flash on Linux at all, because you can already gather “Linux user data” through regular web standards implemented in all browsers such as Local and Session Storage, Offline Storage, IndexedDB, and even without those there’s something called fingerprinting nowadays that potentially doesn’t need to store anything to track you.

      Also, Flash already existed on Linux, and so did LSO. So I’m sorry to say but you need to sharpen your logical thinking and self-skepticism quite a bit.

      I don’t claim to be anything intelligent, but without even thinking I can already see two more likely reasons that Adobe is releasing Flash 24 on Linux:
      1/ Accountability. A bad reputation to Flash in the tech world is bad for Adobe. That’s why they claim that “security is a top priority” and release Flash updates every month.
      2/ Practicality. Flash 11.2 on Linux has been updated for security issues only for a while now. Compatibility issues may have piled up, along with the cost issues of having to maintain two increasingly diverging code bases. Architectural changes may be needed to Flash 11.2 to keep up with discovery of certain security flaws, and at this point might as well go full fledged Flash 24 on Linux while not porting over the features most costly to implement and maintain.

      There could be other reasons, but nothing nefarious.

      1. jern said on December 20, 2016 at 3:59 pm

        Do those “large foods&goods stores” sell memberships? If they do, then they have already made money on the gas they sell. You can bet those stores “break even” and don’t lose money on the gas.

        Second, the stores benefit by having customers drawn to their stores even if the customers buy nothing else. It becomes a form of advertisement by generating “good will”. Advertising is something nearly all businesses do to increase business.

        You observe, “Adobe decided to put Flash on survival mode* in 2012-2013, predicting that it would die anyway and it was in their best interest to move their tools to HTML5 sooner rather than later in order to get the market.”

        If that was true, why didn’t Adobe simply make a 3-4 year “end of support” announcement for Flash – like MS does for Windows? Actually, if you visit this Adobe webpage you will see that “Flash Media Server” is considered a “Supported Perpetual Product.”

        Adobe would not maintain Flash if it was not profitable – either directly or through their customers. Flash for Linux is not for the well-being of mankind.

      2. Jerk said on December 19, 2016 at 9:53 pm

        Sorry about being kind of harsh on you.

        Adobe does not profit from Flash directly. I don’t know whether they are being nice or not, the gist of it is that it’s the best option for them. Accountability is something they need, it’s a matter of brand and there aren’t many things of higher value to a product company than brand.

        Practicality is for them, it’s organisational. In that case, they would have calculated that doing what they do now costs them less money than not doing it given the projected remaining lifespan of Flash. (Adobe decided to put Flash on survival mode* in 2012-2013, predicting that it would die anyway and it was in their best interest to move their tools to HTML5 sooner rather than later in order to get the market.)

        Bit of an anecdote. In my country there are large foods&goods stores like Walmart. Next to the stores they put gas stations and sell gas at a price that ensures they have no benefit. They buy gas, move it, store it, maintain the stations, and sell the gas at a price that just make them break even. Why are they doing that ? Does that necessarily mean they are nice ?


        * Reduced team, almost no new feature. The focus is on security and, for Windows and Mac, compatibility.

      3. jern said on December 19, 2016 at 5:30 pm


        First, you’re the reason I visit websites like Martin’s. I may not be right and if I’m not I find out about it very quickly from someone like you. Thanks for your input.

        Second, I don’t see anyone in the tech world doing anything right now for FREE. Your explanations of “accountability” and “practicality” suggest that Adobe is acting out of the goodness of it heart. I don’t believe that.

        I’m not suggesting that Adobe is doing anything more “nefarious” than any other tech company right now. I’m suggesting that they using Flash to help their commercial customers make money. At a point in time when everyone seems interested in getting rid of Flash, ask yourself, how does Adobe profit by supporting it?

    2. MdN said on December 19, 2016 at 1:36 am

      There’s a “Better Privacy” extension for Firefox to get rid of those Flash cookies. Even without it, they are in the .macromedia folder and can be deleted manually, if anyone wants to check. You are right, they could be made to do all sorts of suspicious things, and you never know.

  10. Yuliya said on December 18, 2016 at 7:56 pm

    Flash is gone from my PC for about half a year. I have Chrom PAF just in case I ever need Flash.. and I never needed it since then. The only thing holding me back was VK which for some reason didn’t use HTML5 in FireFox until this summer.

    1. pHROZEN gHOST said on December 18, 2016 at 10:04 pm

      @Yuliya, I would love to get an account on VK.COM. I don’t have a “ball and chain” (cellphone). For this reason alone, I am not allowed to have an account. This is real silly.

      1. MdN said on December 19, 2016 at 1:38 am

        Can’t you borrow someone’s phone just for the activation sms? ;-) Great site for having no friends but a ton of content.

  11. Anonymous said on December 18, 2016 at 7:24 pm

    Adobe should release a 64 bit driver for my printer too so that i can try Linux.

    1. Heimen Stoffels said on December 19, 2016 at 11:08 am

      Adobe doesn’t make printers, so why would they be the one to create a driver?

  12. Curtis K said on December 18, 2016 at 6:53 pm

    I am surprised this software/program still here in 2016….. It’s already in progress (ending support) by browser’ developer (Google/Mozilla/Microsoft).

    I will say my prediction for the following Q1 2017: Browser’s already ended support. Q2 2017: Adobe Flash have security vulnerabilties. (Always)

  13. Clairvaux said on December 18, 2016 at 6:05 pm

    Just for laughs, my bank offers an online Visa payment system with disposable card numbers (a very good thing in itself). Until they changed the software a few months ago, the interface was based on… Flash.

    I wrote them, telling that was a self-defeating decision for a security-oriented application. All I got was a canned response on the line of “your security is paramount to us, nothing ever happened, sleep tight”, etc.

    I also know of a few big media or big corporations sites where Flash is still in use, so it’s by no means limited to shady corners of the Web.

  14. Erica said on December 18, 2016 at 5:21 pm

    nobody cares anymore, Adobe. Flash is dead.

  15. pHROZEN gHOST said on December 18, 2016 at 4:45 pm

    Flash is all but dead. Is anyone at Adobe aware of this?

  16. Earl said on December 18, 2016 at 4:36 pm

    The only thing I’ve used Flash for in years is Pandora, which I use now only on a Roku box or an Android device.

  17. MdN said on December 18, 2016 at 3:54 pm

    Didn’t even notice I actually do have Flash 24 on my computer, just checked what Firefox says. I guess it updated. Good for them, but I disabled it more than a year ago and only needed to enable it once or twice since then, and it wasn’t worth it.
    I do know a few people who need it for some sketchy websites with pirate movies and series but once I tried a site like that it asked me to disable my ad blocker, and even then it still wouldn’t play because I haven’t disabled enough. Some people with Windows going to sites like that, whereas a Linux guy like me won’t touch them with a stick. Oh well.

    1. Heimen Stoffels said on December 19, 2016 at 11:05 am

      There are still some YouTube videos that aren’t converted to HTML5 yet. Also, even some non-sketchy sites use it still. For example, one of the best known Dutch consumer news sites, Radar, still uses Flash for its video content. Same goes for American news site ABC (maybe not all of their videos, but it regularly asks me to install Flash Player in order to play a video). Many online games (for example on Kongregate) also still use Flash.

    2. wolfsjunge said on December 18, 2016 at 10:40 pm

      uBlock Origin + Reek Anti-Adblocker Killer

      Problem solved.

      1. MdN said on December 19, 2016 at 12:58 pm

        @wolfsjunge I have uMatrix but you’re right, might try some anti-adblock thing too.
        @Heimen I know, BBC videos are one example too. I was just pointing out a “bad” example of needing Flash.

  18. Clairvaux said on December 18, 2016 at 3:50 pm

    Nice !… So Linux users will be able at least to benefit from the gazillion exploits that have plagued Flash up to now, and that have lead to its demise ? Not enough malware reached Linux computers, and that was a problem !

    1. Bryan said on December 18, 2016 at 7:58 pm

      Feeling left out of the larger community of exploited persons, I went to install flash. Alas, they want to directly install it with the apt protocol which my firefox doesn’t support. Forever an outsider.

      1. Taylor said on December 19, 2016 at 4:18 am

        I thought I was the only one who was having a weird issue with that. I was wondering why it was trying to open an “AptURL.” Haha

  19. Maelish said on December 18, 2016 at 3:42 pm

    Desperation to keep your product alive & relevent will make you do funny things.

    1. Dabla said on December 18, 2016 at 6:06 pm

      And not getting it will make you say funny things :)

  20. CHEF-KOCH said on December 18, 2016 at 3:05 pm

    – WASTED –

    1. jIMMYb said on December 19, 2016 at 10:25 am

      Ubuntu 16.04??

Leave a Reply

Check the box to consent to your data being stored in line with the guidelines set out in our privacy policy

We love comments and welcome thoughtful and civilized discussion. Rudeness and personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please stay on-topic.
Please note that your comment may not appear immediately after you post it.