logologo
  • How it works
  • Why It Matters
  • Statistics
  • Pricing
  • FAQ
  • API
logologo
  • How it works
  • Why It Matters
  • Statistics
  • Pricing
  • FAQ
  • API
HTPBE?

Structural PDF tamper detection API. Catches edits your KYC stack misses.

Product

  • How It Works
  • Why It Matters
  • Use Cases
  • Pricing

Developers

  • API Reference
  • GitHub/docs
  • Changelogv2.37.1

Resources

  • About
  • Blog
  • Comparisons
  • Legal & Imprint

© 2024–2026 TMI Iurii Rogulia · VAT ID: FI29845875 · Made in Finland 🇫🇮

Status

Algorithm v2.37.1

Tool profile

Adobe LiveCycle Designer

Adobe LiveCycle Designer appears on both legitimate first-generation output and downstream re-save flows — context (the other tool on the same document) is what flips the signal.

Back to all statistics
Forensic verdict

Mixed signal

Based on this tool’s share of the HTPBE? corpus.

Modification rate
67%+19pp above baseline
Corpus baseline: 48%
Corpus share
0.10%
Share of all analyzed appearances
Modification rate
67%
+19pp above baseline
Role split
92%C/8%P
Creator vs Producer share of appearances

Corpus profile

How Adobe LiveCycle Designer shows up in HTPBE? corpus

Adobe LiveCycle Designer is one of the PDF-handling tools surfaced in the HTPBE? corpus. Adobe LiveCycle Designer appears predominantly as the original Creator (92% of its occurrences) — i.e. on documents that started life inside Adobe LiveCycle Designer rather than passing through it as a downstream re-saver.

In the HTPBE? corpus the contextual signal we look for is a producer/creator mismatch: when Adobe LiveCycle Designer appears as the latest Producer on a document whose Creator was an institutional source (e.g. Adobe PDF Library, Microsoft Word, a banking back-end), the document was rebuilt or re-saved after its original creation. That mismatch is the marker — never the tool itself.

On documents where Adobe LiveCycle Designer acts as Creator, 64% carry modification markers; on documents where it acts as Producer, 100% do. These are observed rates inside the HTPBE? corpus and should be read as base-rates, not as accusations against Adobe LiveCycle Designer or its users.

The signal
In the HTPBE? corpus the contextual signal we look for is a producer/creator mismatch: when Adobe LiveCycle Designer appears as the latest Producer on a document whose Creator was an institutional source (e.g. Adobe PDF Library, Microsoft Word, a banking back-end), the document was rebuilt or re-saved after its original creation. That mismatch is the marker — never the tool itself.

Role in the workflow

How Adobe LiveCycle Designer shows up in metadata

Every PDF carries a Creator (the application that produced the original document) and a Producer (the engine that wrote the PDF). The same tool can appear in either slot, with very different modification profiles.

CAs Creator · 92%
As Producer · 8%P
CAs Creator
  • Share of appearances
    92%
  • Modification rate
    64%
  • Avg file size
    351 KB
PAs Producer
  • Share of appearances
    8%
  • Modification rate
    100%
  • Avg file size
    1.3 MB

How to read this

The Creator slot typically reflects where a document started life. The Producer slot reflects whatever wrote the bytes — and is the field that gets overwritten when a PDF is opened, edited, and saved by a downstream tool.

A higher modification rate as Producer than as Creator usually means the tool is acting as a re-saver on documents that originated elsewhere. A higher rate as Creator points to fragile workflows around the original authoring app.

Name fingerprints

Also goes by

Different version strings and spellings observed for Adobe LiveCycle Designer in the wild. All are merged into the same canonical profile.

Adobe LiveCycle Designer 11.066.7%
Adobe LiveCycle Designer ES 9.033.3%

Why variants matter

The same tool publishes itself under 2 different metadata strings — version bumps, locale tags, build IDs. We canonicalize them so the corpus reflects one identity, not noise.

Most common
Adobe LiveCycle Designer 11.0
66.7% of appearances
Variant spread
2 distinct strings
Long-tail share: 33.3%
Observed range
17.02.2012 → 10.04.2026

Distributions

What ships alongside Adobe LiveCycle Designer

The PDF versions Adobe LiveCycle Designer writes when acting as Producer, and the other tools that appear in the same documents.

PDF versions written

Most output is PDF 1.7 (100% of files where Adobe LiveCycle Designer is the Producer).

PDF 1.7100.0%

Common Producers when Adobe LiveCycle Designer is the Creator

Adobe PDF Library writes 64% of these files — that pairing is the Adobe-stack default for many institutional pipelines.

Adobe PDF Library63.6%
PSPDFKit9.1%
Adobe Experience Manager forms output9.1%
Adobe LiveCycle Output 9.09.1%

Related profiles

Tools you’ll see next to Adobe LiveCycle Designer

Other tools that frequently share metadata with Adobe LiveCycle Designer in the same documents. Each card links to its own forensic profile.

P58% co-occurrence
Adobe PDF Library
Corpus share1.6%
Mod rate71%
P8% co-occurrence
PSPDFKit
Corpus share0.03%
Mod rate100%
P8% co-occurrence
Adobe Experience Manager forms output
Corpus share0.00%
Mod rate0%
P8% co-occurrence
Adobe LiveCycle Output 9.0
Corpus share0.00%
Mod rate100%

Long tail

Notable observations

Smaller cuts of the Adobe LiveCycle Designer corpus — useful context, but treat each row as a single data point rather than a strong signal.

Digitally signed
33%

Of files carry at least one digital signature

Embedded files
17%

Of files have attachments inside

Avg pages per document
4.5
Oldest observed
17.02.2012 — over 14 years ago

Secure your workflow

Create your account — API key on signup, free test environment on every plan.
From $15/mo. No sales call. Cancel any time.

Start Free — Close the Structural Fraud GapSee Pricing
Read API Docs →