Slashdot Mirror


F-Secure Suggests Ditching Adobe Reader For Free PDF Viewers

hweimer writes "Yesterday at RSA security conference, F-Secure's chief research officer recommended dropping Adobe Reader for viewing PDF files because of the huge amount of targeted attacks against it. Instead, he pointed to PDFreaders.org, a website maintaining a list of free and open source PDF viewers."

14 of 249 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Not Much Cross-Platform by dov_0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've been using Evince on Linux for years now. No dramas. Runs about 10 times faster than the Adobe Reader as well.

    Does whether a particular reader is cross-platform really matter? Most people only seem to use the zoom in/out, scroll up/down and preview pane functions anyway. Not a lot to figure out on a different system...

    --
    sudo mount --milk --sugar /cup/tea /mouth /etc/init.d/relax start
  2. Acrobat: The Worlds Worst Software by gilgongo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Acrobat utterly takes the biscuit when it comes to being the most execrably awful, arrogant, bloated, buggy, piece of software ever made, ever. And that's in a world where Microsoft exists as well.

    But as if that isn't bad enough, it ALSO ranks as the most tragic irony in *all* *computing* *history* that such a screamingly, revoltingly, tear-out-your-hair-and-become-a-monk awful software is essentially based on an open standard. I'll say that again: PDF is an *open* ISO standard. HOW did Adobe rape and strangle it to death like they did? If anyone wants an example of how unspeakably evil marketing and sharp practices can be, they need look no further than Adobe Acrobat.

    If I never used Acrobat ever again it would be too soon.

    --
    "And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
    1. Re:Acrobat: The Worlds Worst Software by spinkham · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Acrobat utterly takes the biscuit when it comes to being the most execrably awful, arrogant, bloated, buggy, piece of software ever made, ever. And that's in a world where Microsoft exists as well.

      I see you never used Visual SourceSafe.

      But yes, Acrobat sucks.

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
  3. Re:Already there by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Foxit has a couple of problems with some forms-based PDFs my work gave me, but on the other hand, it lets me save form field values in pdfs where acrobat won't.

    It's great; I got sick of the bloat ware and "run all the time! in the background! always show up with checks for prompts for updates every time I open my browser!" that adobe has turned into.

    now if foxit only made a flash player

  4. Re:Already there by FlyingBishop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually, the article specifically suggests that Adobe needs to improve its automatic update system, not remove it.

    Foxit is getting pretty widely used, and it will be especially vulnerable if it lacks a mechanism to update itself automatically.

    Convenience != good architecture.

    I'm not sure who are more dangerous, those that don't update because they don't know what updates are, or those that don't update because they're too paranoid about corporations whose software they already use to allow that software to be patched against demonstrated security issues.

    That said, Adobe is bloated. It just has nothing to do with running all the time in the background and prompting for updates, but just with generally shitty programming. Anything used for a significant portion of web traffic needs to have a mechanism to automatically retrieve updates, especially if the user is to lazy make sure that their system is up to date and secure.

  5. Re:Not Much Cross-Platform by buchner.johannes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The websites are the horror from a windows end-user point of view.

    Okular: no download, build descriptions?
    MuPDF: A parser description?
    Yap: That screenshot ...
    Sumatra PDF: Looks good.

    --
    NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
  6. Re:Already there by QRDeNameland · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What about those of us who don't update because we're too lazy?

    Then there's those of us who don't update because we've been burnt by updates breaking things way too many times in the past.

    --
    Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
  7. Re:What about DRM PDFs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Open the file as a text file and look for the comment that says something like it is a violation of the DMCA to remove the following lines. Remove the following lines. Repeat. This is of course assuming that you don't think it's a violation of the DMCA to remove the lines in question.

  8. Re:nice that there was an MS rep there to pay him by moderatorrater · · Score: 3, Insightful

    using this guys logic, he should be saying to dump Microsoft and use another OS due to the large number of breakins on Windows boxes.

    Unless he thought that the cost of switching OSes was significantly higher than the cost of switching to another free piece of software on top of that OS. With Windows, people need it to do things that no other operating system can do, namely, running Windows-only applications as well as they can be run. Switching to another OS requires either dealing with emulation, a VM, or not being able to run those programs at all. In addition, there are costs in either a steep learning curve going to linux or hardware to get a Mac. Cost to change: many, many hours of learning or a few thousand dollars.

    On the other hand, as long as these PDF readers can read any pdf that adobe can, and as long as they're free like adobe is, there's no other cost. Hell, you can even have adobe installed just in case you'll need it, but make another reader the default for everything, thereby giving you the security of having another reader without any loss in functionality. Cost to change: maybe half an hour.

    In other words, your bias is showing.

  9. better -- use pdfs appropriately! by owlnation · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually, what would also be a huge help (regardless of reader) would be to only use PDF where it was appropriate to do so -- namely, when the end user actually needs to print said document.

    I realize there's pretty much no point in saying this, as it seems that many designers -- especially in large organizations -- seem to give little thought to the end user, and the usability of their site. (inappropriate or unnecessary use of pdf, flash, javascript, popups (still!) etc )

    I'm tired of going to a site to find that in order to find out -- for example, where an event is going to take place -- that I have to download a 3 page pdf document, one that would have been so much easier and quicker and accessible as html on a webpage.

    I'm willing to bet that, at the very least, half of all pdfs created do not need to be pdfs in the first place.

  10. Okular has no chance there ... by MartinSchou · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Okular has no chance there. Not amongst regular Windows users at least.

    Step 1 - Go to PDFreaders.org - no issue
    Step 2 - Click on "Download" on the intersection between Okular and Windows - no issue
    Step 3 - Click "Download latest installer for immediate installation. - no issue
    Step 4 - Run the KDE installer - not so much an issue, as what it does is
    Step 5 - Click Next - "install from Internet" is the default setting, sounds reasonable
    Step 6 - Select a download server - "What the hell did I just download then?"
    Step 7 - Select an available release - Ehh? Whut?
    Step 8 - Select the package you want to install - Well, that's just fucked up. 140+ packages to choose from. They're sorted by package name ONLY, cannot sort by package notes.
    Step 9 - Look for something called Okular as package name. None found
    Step 10 - "Oh, well, maybe these are packages I want in addition to Okular. I mean, I downloaded the Okular installer, right?"
    Step 11 - Click Next
    Step 12 - Installation/Update finished
    Step 13 - Realise that NOTHING has been installed.
    Step 14 - Get annoyed
    Step 15 - Call tech support (realise this is a free program and there's noone to yell at)
    Step 16 - Download and run the installer again (because they forgot where they downloaded it to)
    Step 17 - Get to the package list and start reading very carefully
    Step 18 - Wonder why the hell the package list goes Czech, Kashubian, Welsh, Danish, German, Greek, English, Esperanto, Spanish, Estonian [spelling package]
    Step 19 - Realise there's still no Okular package anywhere
    Step 20 - Read the list for the 3rd time and note that "Graphics applications" has a note "(including Okular)"
    Step 21 - Wonder why the hell the download Okular link from before doesn't give you the fucking package to begin with
    Step 22 - Notice that you're now downloading 40 (forty!) packages from the servers
    Step 23 - Notice that one of these files are 60+ MB
    Step 24 - Wonder why they call Acrobat Reader bloated and slow when that installer is less than 25 MB and takes about 30 seconds to install, just by clicking Next until you're done.
    Step 25 - Notice that you now have a folder called "Programs" in your Start menu's program folder, which is aparently a sym-link to the program folder (doesn't point to itself though)
    Step 26 - Find the "KDE 4.22 Release" folder in Programs and notice these programs:

    • Help
    • Graphics\More Applications\KColorChooser (Color Chooser)
    • Graphics\More Applications\KRuler (Screen Ruler)
    • Graphics\Gwenview (Image Viewer)
    • Graphics\KolourPaint (Paint Program)
    • Graphics\Okular (Document Viewer)
    • Network\KNetAttach (Network Folder Wizard)

    Step 27 - Wonder once more why the hell people call Acrobat Reader bloated when this program installs with 5 extra programs.
    Step 28 - Start the bloody program!
    Step 29 - KConf_update.exe would like to run. So, Acrobat Reader running its updater - Bad! This - GOOD!
    Step 30 - TRY to put frustrations aside and use the program

    That installer REALLY needs some work.

    And if you are going to have a Windows program, be as kind as to have an actual uninstaller. NONE of the KDE programs installed are listed in (Add/Remove)Programs(and Features). No uninstallers in the start menu either. I realise a lot of vocal FOSS supporters don't like Windows, but please - if you're going to advocate FOSS, at least make it live up to the LOW standards of Windows software (the non-malicious part of that group).

  11. This is slashdot! by Kludge · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Step 1: Don't buy anything with DRM protection.
    Step 2: Repeat.

  12. Re:Already there by jbn-o · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Foxit Reader is proprietary, no more inspectable or modifiable than Adobe's PDF reader and therefore no more trustworthy than any other proprietary software. No proprietary software is not a good solution to the problems faced with Adobe's proprietary PDF Reader. You are merely jumping from one proprietor to another.

    A reasonable recommendation is a FLOSS PDF reader such as Sumatra, Skim, or one of the other fine PDF readers recommended by PDFReaders.org.

  13. Re:Already there by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Like Firefox? They've perfected the way they do updates.