Useful tool -- it's trivial to make a RAT bypass chat/email .doc/.PDF attachments.
I don't open any files on my PC from people I don't personally know -- use webviewers.
I don't open any files on my PC from people I don't personally know -- use webviewers.
Click-through rate for a technically legitimate "you are party to a lawsuit" email must be sky high.
edit: Thank you for both answers. I thought it had to do with sandbox rationale, but couldn't mentally get past the fact that sandbox could potentially be escaped too. Eh, I think it is time for sleep.
Safer: definitely. Given that the collective amount of PDF attacks is some number, now this particular PDF needs to attack PDF and the webviewer. Assuming that 1% of all PDFs do that, I'd say it's 100 times safer than not using a webviewer.
If you still think that 1% of all potential PDF attacks is too unsafe, then that's a different discussion.
If you think my 1% is off, then that's a different discussion too. All I'm saying is that it's safer.
What's the most popular, Chrome browser I'd have thought?
The Preview.app sandbox is not quite as secure as what is used by browsers such as Firefox or Chrome on macOS for web content, so there is probably still a benefit to viewing PDFs in the browser, depending on whether the browser or PDF viewer is more hardened against these attacks.