I see so there really is a signature check. Guess we will need to have our plugin properly signed if we are to use it on vendor builds. Is this for security reasons? Because otherwise why not just prompt a permission to the user and allow plugins to run if permitted.
On Dec 14, 5:06 am, Tim <[email protected]> wrote: > If your just developing it, make sure that ro.secure is off. This will > bypass the signature check and allow any browser plugin to be loaded -- > without being signed by the build key. > > This is one of the reasons Adobe Flash works on custom roms. > > -Tim Strazzere > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Miles <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > If I develop a plugin for the DEFAULT Android web browser, do I need > > to have it signed with a proper signature? Currently I've heard that > > only the Adobe FLASH package signature is supported by the browser. > > > Has anybody been successful in running their browser plugin on an > > Android device? Is this signature limitation true? > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Android Security Discussions" group. > > To post to this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/android-security-discuss?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Security Discussions" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-security-discuss?hl=en.
