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
  • Use Cases
  • Metadata Viewer
  • Pricing

Developers

  • API Reference
  • GitHub/docs
  • Changelogv2.44.3

Resources

  • About
  • Blog
  • Comparisons
  • Legal & Imprint

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

Status

Algorithm v2.44.3

Tool profile

Adobe Scan

Adobe Scan 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
28%-21pp below baseline
Corpus baseline: 49%
Corpus share
0.24%
Share of all analyzed appearances
Modification rate
28%
-21pp below baseline
Role split
50%C/50%P
Creator vs Producer share of appearances

Corpus profile

How Adobe Scan shows up in HTPBE? corpus

Adobe Scan is one of the PDF-handling tools surfaced in the HTPBE? corpus. Adobe Scan splits its occurrences between Creator (50%) and Producer (50%) roles, meaning it sometimes originates documents and sometimes re-emits them after another tool created them.

In the HTPBE? corpus the contextual signal we look for is a producer/creator mismatch: when Adobe Scan 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 Scan acts as Creator, 28% carry modification markers; on documents where it acts as Producer, 28% do. These are observed rates inside the HTPBE? corpus and should be read as base-rates, not as accusations against Adobe Scan or its users.

The signal
In the HTPBE? corpus the contextual signal we look for is a producer/creator mismatch: when Adobe Scan 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 Scan 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 · 50%
As Producer · 50%P
CAs Creator
  • Share of appearances
    50%
  • Modification rate
    28%
  • Avg file size
    344 KB
PAs Producer
  • Share of appearances
    50%
  • Modification rate
    28%
  • Avg file size
    387 KB

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 Scan in the wild. All are merged into the same canonical profile.

Adobe Scan for iOS 26.03.1948.3%
Adobe Scan for Android 23.12.08-google-dynamic10.3%
Adobe Scan for Android 26.06.12-google-dynamic6.9%
Adobe Scan for Android 20.12.09-regular3.4%
Adobe Scan for iOS 26.03.063.4%
Adobe Scan for Android 25.06.19-google-dynamic3.4%
Adobe Scan for Android 25.12.03-google-dynamic3.4%
Adobe Scan for iOS 26.08.123.4%
Adobe Scan for Android 21.06.28-regular3.4%
Adobe Scan for Android 26.03.04-google-dynamic3.4%
Adobe Scan for Android 26.05.12-google-dynamic3.4%
Adobe Scan for iOS 26.01.223.4%
Adobe Scan for Android 25.12.03-samsung-basic1.7%
Adobe Scan Core 1.0.31.7%

Why variants matter

The same tool publishes itself under 14 different metadata strings — version bumps, locale tags, build IDs. We canonicalize them so the corpus reflects one identity, not noise.

Most common
Adobe Scan for iOS 26.03.19
48.3% of appearances
Variant spread
14 distinct strings
Long-tail share: 51.7%
Observed range
02.04.2026 → 18.08.2026

Distributions

What ships alongside Adobe Scan

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

PDF versions written

Most output is PDF 1.7 (60% of files where Adobe Scan is the Producer).

PDF 1.760.0%
PDF 1.340.0%

Common Creators when Adobe Scan is the Producer

Adobe Scan sits upstream in 97% of cases — read this row as “what kinds of documents end up routed through Adobe Scan.”

Adobe Scan96.6%
com.motorola.camera3 9.1.27.593.4%

Related profiles

Tools you’ll see next to Adobe Scan

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

P2% co-occurrence
Adobe Acrobat
Corpus share1.5%
Mod rate57%
C2% co-occurrence
com.motorola.camera3 9.1.27.59
Corpus share0.00%
Mod rate0%

Long tail

Notable observations

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

Embedded files
81%

Of files have attachments inside

Avg pages per document
1.9
Oldest observed
02.04.2026 — 5 months ago

Secure your workflow

Create your account — check PDFs on the web or with an API key, both ready on signup.
From $15/mo. No sales call. Cancel any time.

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