"Leaking" a pdf with 'e:\nethome\joe_kitten_lover' doesn't remotely "prove"
anything. If I create a user called MayIMommaDogFaceToTheBannanPatch and
"leaked" a pdf, it doesn't mean Steve Martin was culpable. This is a
non-issue, no matter how much you might want to create some fanciful "bonsai
kitten" theory to get Joe in trouble, dawg.
t
From: WebDawg [mailto:webdawg@gmail.com]
> be an issue, under the assumption that consumers use PDF
> /specifically/ to prevent data leakage.
Exactly. Imagine someone posting (anonymously) copy of EvilCorp's
internal web pages, that prove EvilCorp is planning to produce bonsai
kitten, as .pdf. If the pdf contains 'e:\nethome\joe_kitten_lover'
.. then, well, Joe has a problem.
(It would be bad if that .pdf contained username/hostname, too; I
could imagine even timestamps being problematic.)
(Fixing rejected post)
Meh. I replied to something similar off-list.
"Leaking" a pdf with 'e:\nethome\joe_kitten_lover' doesn't remotely "prove" anything. If I create a user called MayIMommaDogFaceToTheBannanPatch and "leaked" a pdf, it doesn't mean Steve Martin was culpable. This is a non-issue, no matter how much you might want to create some fanciful "bonsai kitten" theory to get Joe in trouble, dawg.
t
From: WebDawg [mailto:webdawg@gmail.com]
