On Friday 11 January 2008 03:12:46 Philippe Landau wrote:
> Anders Johansson wrote:
> > On Friday 11 January 2008 02:25:57 Don Raboud wrote:
> >> Among the options one can set in Acrobat reader is to specify a proxy
> >> which I usually set to 127.0.0.1 to avoid things like this.  (I am not
> >> paranoid, just don't like the very idea.)  Of course, being closed
> >> source one has no idea if acrobat reader honors these settings or not.
> >
> > Sure one has. Just use wireshark to see what it does. It can't bypass
> > that. No need to sit around guessing, or tell scary stories
> >
> > I have a hunch lots of people already have done that though, and if it
> > did bad things, we would have heard about it by now, a lot louder than
> > vague rumours on mailing lists
>
> No need to insult if you follow the provided link there (see below)
> or do some online research on your own confirming what is
> now known since over two years.

By the way, I just discovered that since late 2005, Adobe actually disabled 
this feature (the feature in question was that acroread let javascript 
silently download URLs in the background without telling the user- that was 
how the notification worked)

If a PDF today tries to access a URL, acroread will tell the user about it and 
give him a chance to prevent it. I guess they responded to the articles - and 
I guess that's why all the articles about this are over two years old (not 
counting all the blogs that only quote those old articles)

So I think this problem is gone from acroread, but again: to make sure, use 
wireshark to determine what the program actually does on the network

And if anyone does discover something happening that should be happening, file 
a security bug about it. These things are taken seriously

Anders

-- 
Madness takes its toll
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to