<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: PDF Reader Exploitation 2009</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.threatfire.com/2009/03/pdf-reader-exploitation-2009.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.threatfire.com/2009/03/pdf-reader-exploitation-2009.html</link>
	<description>ThreatFire™ AntiVirus protects when others can&#039;t</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 19:21:30 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://blog.threatfire.com/2009/03/pdf-reader-exploitation-2009.html/comment-page-1#comment-132</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 22:52:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newblog.threatfire.com/2009/03/pdf-reader-exploitation-2009/#comment-132</guid>
		<description>Why is nobody posting vulnerability information or data regarding Acrobat 6?&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;It may not be the current version, but it still opens the vast majority of pdf files currently being published, and if it&#039;s vulnerability profile is reduced compared to versions 7 through 9 then there is no reason not to consider using it as an alternative to the (apparently) more vulnerable versions.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;I have tested win98/Acrobat 6.0.2 against some of the proof of concept examples that are available  and have not found them to function as designed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why is nobody posting vulnerability information or data regarding Acrobat 6?</p>
<p>It may not be the current version, but it still opens the vast majority of pdf files currently being published, and if it&#8217;s vulnerability profile is reduced compared to versions 7 through 9 then there is no reason not to consider using it as an alternative to the (apparently) more vulnerable versions.</p>
<p>I have tested win98/Acrobat 6.0.2 against some of the proof of concept examples that are available  and have not found them to function as designed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
