Why do Adobe think it acceptable to install a McAfee product that I don't need, don't want, and didn't ask for when downloading flashplayer?

[NotWantingMcAfee]

At no point was I given the option to opt out / opt in. It just installed itself as part of flash player.

Very poor show from Adobe.

[jeromiec83223024]

Did you happen to download it from inside of Firefox?

[NotWantingMcAfee]

I think so, yes. I can't be 100% sure as I use both FF and Chrome depending on mood and the sites I'm accessing. I also have AdBlock Plus installed on both, if that makes a difference.

[jeromiec83223024]

Yeah, I hear about this from time to time.  Sorry that you ran into this.

If you download directly from Adobe via the link here, you'll always get the option to opt out:

http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/

What I believe is going on, is that Firefox added Flash Player to their plug-in finder UI, but I think they're linking directly to binary that bundles McAfee.  They really need to be directing you to our download center webpage (above), so that you get the correct experience and the opportunity to opt-out from those bundles.  The intent is not to give you bundled software without your authorization.

On a positive note, as long as you leave Automatic Updates enabled for Flash Player, we'll just keep it updated in the background for you, so you won't need to deal with that problem twice.

[jeromiec83223024]

Oh, and for completeness, Flash Player is a bundled component in Chrome, so there's no separate download, bundled offer, etc, etc.

[NotWantingMcAfee]

Thank you for taking the time to explain the cause behind this. Have you approached Mozilla about this issue? If it's a linking issue within Firefox then it's not really Adobe's fault, but to a casual user such as myself it certainly seems that I'm having crapware forcibly installed on my machine

Thank you.

[jeromiec83223024]

Yeah, no problem.  It took me a really long time to figure out, mostly because the vast majority of posters were too mad to explain how it happened.  I spent an obscene amount of time testing our distribution mechanisms with every combination of browser, privacy plug-in, ad-blocker, etc, to try and figure out where these complaints were coming from.  I've seen a couple hints in more recent posts that indicate it's the Firefox add-in manager, which is why I asked.

I do know that the companies have met and discussed the distribution business at length, and that they understand our stance on how Flash Player is distributed to end-users.  For better or worse, the distribution business makes it possible for Adobe to provide and maintain Flash Player free of charge to 99% of desktops on the Internet, and it's a tremendously expensive undertaking.

I'm not sure if this is something that was fixed on the Firefox side and is now broken again, or if it's just been really quiet for some reason -- I haven't seen this complaint in quite a while.  I'll raise this with our distribution team and try to get some tractions.  They have all the technical details for guidance, so they're better positioned to report the issue.  It's really unfortunate that end-users are getting caught in the middle of this, and is definitely something that I do want to see resolved.

Thanks again, and sorry for the hassle.