3 ms·

Yeah, those are vulnerabilities in some PDF readers. Different deal.

• pjc50 10y ago
  That's a bit no-true-Scotsman? There's a history of PDF exploits that have made people wary. The exploits are delivered in the PDF, therefore some PDFs are 'unsafe'. (As other comments have said, we shouldn't take "omg gchq are going to serve me an exploit PDF" too seriously, but there have been incidents of security services using PDF exploits to spear-phish people) Edit: an example bank PDF exploit is mentioned in: http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2016/05/13/2161789/how-to-steal-a-cyber-billion-swiftly/ http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2016/05/13/2161789/how-to-steal-a...
  • matthewmacleod 10y ago
    That's true, only in the sense that all software ever published may have vulnerabilities, meaning there is no format which is 'safe'. That's fine, if that's your definition, but it's obviously useless for comparison.
    • geofft 10y ago
      No, it's not useless, if you don't round off to a binary "could have vulnerabilities". Many PDF readers have had many vulnerabilities; this is a historical fact. It's much less likely that e.g. some Markdown rendered to HTML by GitHub will have a zero-day.