Sumatra PDF Reader v1.4 [Archive] - Wilders Security Forums

LODBROK

March 14th, 2011, 02:54 PM

Dermot7: thanks!!

I set Sumatra to open PDFs in Firefox. Fast! When running FF in Sandboxie, opening a PDF link will launch Sumatra and the downloaded PDF in the sandbox. Very safe IMHO. (You need to add Sumatra's exe to Sandboxie's Internet Access list, of course.)

-{ Quote: "i don't do "me too" posts usually but i think Sumatra deserves it." }-
+1 :thumb:

-{ Quote: "Any better than Foxit?" }-
No real comparison between Sumatra and Foxit; would be like comparing Notepad and WordPad. And how would anyone know what you think might constitute "better"?

I use Foxit as my default PDF reader as it better handles some of the "fancier PDF stuff" that can make rendering in Sumatra a bit sloppy. And Sumatra's page navigation tools are tedious when reading large documents. Other tools and features are primitive, but that's what makes it "better." "Better because it doesn't have the bloat," as the Bloat Card folks like to toss that term around. Compared to Adobe Reader, Foxit is "better because it doesn't have the bloat." ::)

Trooper

March 14th, 2011, 03:15 PM

Wow this place has certainly changed over the years. Did not realize each post has to be so specific where no one can ask a general question without having to write a thesis on a how, why, or is question.

This place has become to elitist it seems. :isay:

moontan

March 14th, 2011, 03:55 PM

portableapps.com has a portable version you can try:
-http://portableapps.com/apps/office/sumatra_pdf_portable-

Pinga

March 14th, 2011, 04:30 PM

Sumatra is portable by default!

pajenn

March 14th, 2011, 08:00 PM

Sumatra PDF is always my choice for all secondary systems (BartPE, WinPE, test or virtual PCs, recovery disks, ... ) -- whenever all I need is a basic PDF reader with small size Sumatra (zip-version) is the ticket.

Sumatra (zip-version) is under 2 MB whereas Adobe Acrobat X clocks in around 2 GB. Obviously Adobe offers a lot more functionality (and it's the industry standard so you need it for work stuff), but if all you want is a small, basic pdf reader, then Sumatra is the way to go.

Mr.PC

March 15th, 2011, 10:19 AM

-{ Quote: "Wow this place has certainly changed over the years.
Did not realize each post has to be so specific where no one can ask a general question without
having to write a thesis on a how, why, or is question." }-
+1 :thumb:

moontan

March 15th, 2011, 01:59 PM

i downloaded the portable version from the site yesterday.

Hitman Pro using PrevX engine flagged it as a program which exhibited the characteristics of malware.

checking with VirusTotal Prevx was the only one who flagged it as suspicious.

bellgamin

March 15th, 2011, 02:40 PM

I installed Sumatra. When I executed it, my firewall reported that Sumatra was seeking to connect out. I blocked it. Then my connection was broken & I couldn't fix it by the usual means. Whether the break was caused by Sumatra or by my firewall -- this I do not know. (I don't think my firewall did it because I have had the firewall block many connections in the past & it never before resulted in a total disconnect from the internet.)

In any event I had to restore an image in order to get things working properly again.

I removed Sumatra -- just on general principles, since I have 2 other PDF readers & do not really need another one -- especially one with (possibly) suspicious activities.

I see no need for a PDF reader to connect out. IS there a reason why Sumatra would do this?

moontan

March 15th, 2011, 02:42 PM

-{ Quote: "
I see no need for a PDF reader to connect out. IS there a reason why Sumatra would do this?" }-

yes:

uncheck "Automatically Check for Updates" in the Settings/Options. :)

Windows 7 Firewall Control Free also intercepted the communication attempt.
but i did not have problems here.

Dermot7

March 15th, 2011, 02:48 PM

-{ Quote: "i downloaded the portable version from the site yesterday.

Hitman Pro using PrevX engine flagged it as a program which exhibited the characteristics of malware.

checking with VirusTotal Prevx was the only one who flagged it as suspicious." }-
Did you RClick detection "quarantine" arrow and "report this file as safe"?
I checked and Prevx itself does not detect, so it's only HMP's version of Prevx database, so some updating must be needed, and this shouldn't still be happening. PortableApps still showing v1.3?

moontan

March 15th, 2011, 02:51 PM

-{ Quote: "Did you RClick detection "quarantine" arrow and "report this file as sare"?
I checked and Prevx itself does not detect, so it's only HMP's version of Prevx database, so some updating must be needed, and this shouldn't still be happening. PortableApps still showing v1.3?" }-

no, i did not think about reporting it but i will do so soon.

go directly to the developer site for the 1.4 portable version:
-http://blog.kowalczyk.info/software/sumatrapdf/download-free-pdf-viewer.html-

Dermot7

March 15th, 2011, 03:00 PM

Thanks moontan, yes that was 1.4 portable from author's official site that I used for ss above.

bellgamin

March 15th, 2011, 10:32 PM

-{ Quote: "go directly to the developer site for the 1.4 portable version" }-Thanks. I much prefer the portable version.

Also, I unchecked the auto update. Don't know why I didn't think of that (duhhhh) :P

LODBROK

March 16th, 2011, 02:15 PM

-{ Quote: "Sumatra is portable by default!" }-
Elitist thesis on a how, why or is:

Krzysztof's SumatraPDF.exe is stand-alone and self-contained and can be launched from any partition, volume or device and writes to the local registry as well as any remote share point registries if opened across enterprise clients. So, not portable. Which is why John T. cooks up one for PortableApps.

Pinga

March 16th, 2011, 05:34 PM

When run from a portable drive, Sumatra PDF will write its settings to sumatrapdfprefs.dat in the application folder.

http://www.portablefreeware.com/index.php?id=1193

Dermot7

March 16th, 2011, 10:01 PM

Developer's comments about latest FPs at Sumatra forum:

JRViejo

March 17th, 2011, 12:02 AM

FYI. Sumatra PDF Portable 1.4 (pdf reader) Released (http://portableapps.com/news/2011-03-16_-_sumatra_pdf_portable_1.4_released), courtesy of PortableApps.com.

ExtremeGamerBR

March 19th, 2011, 08:04 AM

I'm using the portable version of own developer, works very well!

ratchet

March 19th, 2011, 09:09 AM

Admittedly I gave up adobe years ago because it always took so long to load. I went through the popular replacements and have been using Nitro for a while now. The thing is, Nitro takes as long as adobe ever did to load on my ancient XP machine but kind of like never giving up firefox because of the extensions I use, I can't give Nitro up because of its amazing editing abilities. I suppose I could try Sumatra for just quick reading and still keep Nitro in the tool box for editing. For anyone who needs a pdf tool that goes far beyond just the capability to enter text (fill forms), give Nitro a look!

Bambo

March 20th, 2011, 02:36 AM

Dermot7, yesterday PrevX still flagged Sumatra as malware. I am so used to PrevX not having a clue I hardly notice any more. RJ TextEd and MyPaint got "nailed" yesterday as well. Happens on a regular basis when not using top 20 programs it seems.

Dermot7

March 20th, 2011, 06:13 AM

-{ Quote: "Dermot7, yesterday PrevX still flagged Sumatra as malware. I am so used to PrevX not having a clue I hardly notice any more. RJ TextEd and MyPaint got "nailed" yesterday as well. Happens on a regular basis when not using top 20 programs it seems." }-
Just to clarify, as I said in post #20...for me Prevx (3.0.5.220) didn't detect Sumatra at all, even portable version. The FP came (only 1.4 portable) with Hitman Pro, and I did myself click option to report file as safe, and I found no
detection 1/2 day later.
FWIW, I disagree with your assertion ( imo exaggeration) that Prevx will FP to such a prolific extent nowadays...make sure heuristics not set too high, and perhaps lower a little if you use/install some more rarer applications.

Bambo

March 20th, 2011, 06:21 AM

Let me put it this way. We return to PrevX when the 10 mile long thread about beta version get replaced by actual experiences with it ;) I highly expect improved ways of ignoring programs mistakes.

No I am not doing much exaggeration but am colored by the fact I yesterday were so unlucky to install/update 3 programs in a row - ALL detected as malware by PrevX. In RJ Texted case for the xxnt time. Over the top naturally but will not say that is spectacular or I should feel haunted. You can report false positive all you like, done that ages ago. I have found "Trust Always" to be more effective.

I did not even mention "Nirsoft" :) I can find the post from PrevX rep saying it is a bit wrong to flag him over and over. "We debate this internally" or something close to. Really? I can also show what PrevX detect as of right now or you can do it your self. Change of policy when a weather tool is considered malware I think. Have not checked latest version, doubt it has changed. Anyway I might be spoiled since used to Avast. Other AVs might be just as lazy. BitDefender can be funny I know that. Well, not my impression PrevX work tirelessly to avoid this but we will see with 4. Kind of pointless to whine about 3 but I just felt like it.

I use same version so I guess we are talking random detection as well? Random detection of malware or FPs? Lets hope 4 comes soon, heh.

Mr.PC

March 20th, 2011, 07:04 AM

I'm using Sumatra PDF Reader 1.4 (Installer version).

Just scanned with Hitman Pro: NO Malware found!

Bambo

March 20th, 2011, 07:14 AM

That is fantastic.

Here is what I see as of right now - with no manual help to PrevX. Heuristics is at medium.

Mr.PC

March 20th, 2011, 07:37 AM

Send SumatraPDF.exe to VirusTotal or any other similar service. ;)
BTW, did you try some on-Demand Scanners?

Bambo

March 20th, 2011, 07:43 AM

Don't forget that much of PrevX strengths come from detecting malware during execution. They don't think highly of passive detection. I do believe PrevX rep even said he simply don't see the point. So nope, I trust PrevX and shall get rid of Sumatra ASAP. Not really but how I am supposed to act.

I aim to please so did what you suggested. But is there not a forum rule about not linking to VT or similar? I don't understand why not but pretty sure I noticed that long ago. Possible misunderstanding on my part. You can test your self but result right now is 1/43 and you know which is unique.

Mr.PC

March 20th, 2011, 08:06 AM

-{ Quote: "Don't forget that much of PrevX strengths come from detecting malware during execution. They don't think highly of passive detection. I do believe PrevX rep even said he simply don't see the point. So nope, I trust PrevX and shall get rid of Sumatra ASAP. Not really but how I am supposed to act.
I aim to please so did what you suggested. But is there not a forum rule about not linking to VT or similar? I don't understand why not but pretty sure I noticed that long ago. Possible misunderstanding on my part. You can test your self but result right now is 1/43 and you know which is unique." }-

Many AVs with Real-Time protection have Not flagged Sumatra PDF as Malware.
Clients, Relatives, Friends etc. use different Real-Time AVs and have no problem with Sumatra.

I only referred to VT. I did Not post any Link.
BTW, all online Multi-Scanners showed NO Problem, too.
It's a False Positive.

DOSawaits

March 20th, 2011, 08:28 AM

An AV is only trusted if it tells you how it is infected. What does it detect ?
Traces of what ? It's extremely easy for AV software to assume anything compressed is "Infected"...

Mr.PC

March 20th, 2011, 08:33 AM

I downloaded Prevx and scanned with it.
In terms of Heuristics, I used Default settings and High settings.
While scanning, I opened a couple .pdf files with Sumatra PDF.
NOTHING was found.

Bambo

March 20th, 2011, 08:44 AM

I am fully aware it is a FP - that is why I am shaking head at PrevX!

No portable Sumatra is still not white listed. I can reproduce again and again. I don't know why you don't see it. Compressing "issues" are old as dust. Lame reason if that is the case and I kind of hope Sumatra author ignore. Find a better more intelligent AV if it really bothers you and it is not enough to whine on a security forum! Devs. should not bend over to AVs this way.

DOSawaits, you can say that but not all will appreciate such info. They prefer to live in ignorance, probably goes for most customers of any AV. They need to be told what to do - hence the annoyance when program is totally off. Very few will be able to deal with info but guess we could imagine some sort of link to a page explaining methods to move on, how to deal with it. Then again program is in charge. Situation screams for more info as you say but difficult to put in to program without it becoming an "expert tool". Customers run away fast ;) I guess that is why most AVs do not stuff users with info on specific detections. Also the more they say/advice/promise the more you can blame them for, heh.

Dermot7

March 20th, 2011, 08:55 AM

Bambo, which exact version is being detected for you? I'm assuming it's 1.4 portable, but from where did you download and maybe we can compare MD5s,
because as I said, no version of Sumatra (incl portableapps version) was detected by Prevx for me.

Bambo

March 20th, 2011, 09:28 AM

I did not download anything. Ketarin did. Is set up to get link from Sumatras site or variable which is then used in download link. I guess possible he made a "silent" update to avoid compression mess - if that is the reason for detection. I shall check.
md5 8c8ea116b586e7ce4b9781348ac7fcac
PrevX age and popularity heuristics are both at recommended btw.
And checked and he did not. Same file I get. Anyway as I said I am not going in to a shock seeing PrevX going crazy. Big fan of Nirsoft tools so... Sumatra guy is used to this http://forums.fofou.org/sumatrapdf/topic?id=2018337&comments=7 in blog post about 1.4 he warns about expected detections as well.

Baldrick

March 20th, 2011, 09:52 AM

Its detection by Prevx is an FP (as you say) so why not Allow it and then, from Detection Overrides, right click the entry for it and report it as an FP? That is how Prevx works; it relies on the user based in some measure to report FPs so that they come to their notice and they can correct their database, so that subsequantly, if they get sufficient feedback, the FP is no longer flagged/SumatraPDF is recognised as a valid/trusted application.

I urge you to do your bit! ;)

Bambo

March 20th, 2011, 10:05 AM

"sufficient" being the keyword here and why I wrongly but not 100% totally off said those not digging Top20 programs might see dark side of FPs more than others.

I expect more manual control in version 4.

I can help PrevX with sufficient reporting - Nirsoft programs are not malware. I can also drop it. Same result.

Baldrick

March 20th, 2011, 11:47 AM

Indeed...depends what you want. But you can have the best of both worlds by flagging them as false FPs and having them recorded, on your system, as Detection Overrides...so that you can then use both the Nirsoft Utilities AND Prevx.

That is what I do and it works a treat. ;)

Mr.PC

March 21st, 2011, 08:57 AM

-{ Quote: "I am fully aware it is a FP - that is why I am shaking head at PrevX!" }-
I wonder why you wrote the following:
-{ Quote: "Don't forget that much of PrevX strengths come from detecting malware during execution.They don't think highly of passive detection. So nope, I trust PrevX and shall get rid of Sumatra ASAP." }-

Bambo

March 21st, 2011, 09:06 AM

For crying out loud dude. You need to read and understand words in a context, like previous posts. And stop the selective quote crap please. Right after your cut I said "Not really but what I am supposed to" making it clear even to a stone that I was joking or trying irony.

Yes Baldrick I am aware I can tell PrevX to exclude any file. That process however becomes a bit annoying when you have to repeat it over and over - as is the case with for example RJ TextEd that gets updated often. Which is cool but not when PrevX hate it. The extra scans PrevX insist on when you do this kind of thing might be over in few minutes depending on computer but still annoying. AND I KNOW IT IS A FALSE POSITIVE That was in bold to make it easier to read and understand :) May be forum should automatically make everything bold?

Mr.PC

March 21st, 2011, 09:33 AM

-{ Quote: "Don't forget that much of PrevX strengths come from detecting malware during execution.
They don't think highly of passive detection. So nope, I trust PrevX and shall get rid of Sumatra ASAP." }-
No further comment...

bellgamin

March 21st, 2011, 02:41 PM

-{ Quote: ". . . making it clear even to a stone that I was joking or trying irony." }-A good rule to follow when making a joke is to make it at least a teeny-tiny bit humorous. Failing that, at least add a smiley after an attempted joke/irony/satire -- *just in case*.

IMO some folks, when realizing they posted a less-than-rational remark, will seek to cover it up by saying they were only joking.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NOTE: Please do not be offended by anything Bellgamin has written here because . . . I'm only joking (tee-hee).;D

Baldrick

March 21st, 2011, 04:07 PM

-{ Quote: "
Yes Baldrick I am aware I can tell PrevX to exclude any file. That process however becomes a bit annoying when you have to repeat it over and over - as is the case with for example RJ TextEd that gets updated often. Which is cool but not when PrevX hate it. The extra scans PrevX insist on when you do this kind of thing might be over in few minutes depending on computer but still annoying. AND I KNOW IT IS A FALSE POSITIVE That was in bold to make it easier to read and understand :) May be forum should automatically make everything bold?" }-
I'm with you Mr PC...time to hitch up the wagons and roll out in the other direction, methinks. ;)

Mr.PC

March 22nd, 2011, 06:41 AM

-{ Quote: "IMO some folks, when realizing they posted a less-than-rational remark,
will seek to cover it up by saying they were only joking." }-
+1. :thumb:
At the end, these folks only managed to ridicule themselves. :thumbd: :thumbd: :thumbd:
-{ Quote: "I'm with you Mr.PC...time to hitch up the wagons and roll out in the other direction" }-
Thanks! I agree with you. Too much trouble for Nothing; really Nothing!