3 ms·

It's kind of a downer that the article didn't mention Safari which seems to take a different approach to PDFs. Instead of treating them as "active content", PDF

by isodev 3y ago

It's kind of a downer that the article didn't mention Safari which seems to take a different approach to PDFs. Instead of treating them as "active content", PDF documents are merely rendered with Quartz/Core Graphics and so are free of scripts of any kind. This also has the upside that PDFs look exactly the same everywhere on macOS/iOS, even Quick Look previews. I like Safari's approach much more than having to hunt down some obscure browser setting or trust that it does the right thing.

victor106 3y ago
I agree, some of Safari features are a little backward but they nailed it with this one. Overall Safari and Firefox seem to be the best in terms of privacy and security.
- jacooper 3y ago
  Firefox? Far from it. https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/firefox-chromium.html https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/firefox-chromium.ht...
  - pcwalton 3y ago
    This document is fairly out of date, as clicking through the bug links will illustrate.
    - hollerith 3y ago
      Sure, but do you have any reason to believe that Firefox has become more secure relative to Chrome since then?
      - pcwalton 3y ago
        Yes? A large number of the big ticket bugs, such as win32k lockdown, are now fixed.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
wolverine876 3y ago
So any active content is discarded? That may suit your use case but will be insufficient for others.