3 ms·
Flag whatever you want. From the article: "Such attacks, most often delivered using Adobe PDF documents sent by e-mail, secretly deposit a software file on a u
by jmount 17y ago
Flag whatever you want.
From the article: "Such attacks, most often delivered using Adobe PDF documents sent by e-mail, secretly deposit a software file on a user's hard drive allowing the computer to be remotely accessed. Typically, top personnel with access to high-level information are targeted with such software, known as malware."
That (plus Adobe's insistence of adding scripting to PDF) is why I used the word implicated. Adobe may not have any bad intent on this, but they are possibly partly responsible.
- scott_s 17y agoIn the context of the past few days, your wording implies to me that Adobe was implicated for perpetrating the attacks. That was not your intent, but that's how it sounds to me, and I suspect to most people. A better title is "PDF possible vector for Chinese attacks on Google."
- jmount 17y agoFine, changing "Adobe implicated in Google security breach?" to "PDF possible vector for Chinese attacks on Google." (adding this comment so the above discussion has some remaining context). But I still think Adobe needs a bit of heat on this issue.
- GiraffeNecktie 17y agoUnflagging now that the title is changed to something closer to the actual article. It's a real pain when people use the title of an article to insert their own editorial opinions.