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

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

🇫🇮 Made in Finland

Product

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

Developers

  • API Reference
  • GitHub/docs
  • Changelogv2.18.2

Resources

  • FAQ
  • Blog
  • Comparisons
  • Legal & Imprint

© 2024–2026 TMI Iurii Rogulia · VAT ID: FI29845875

Status

Algorithm v2.18.2

Tool profile

Altiuz Reports

Altiuz Reports 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 362 appearances across the HTPBE? corpus.

Modification rate
100%+52pp above baseline
Corpus baseline: 48%
Total appearances
362
1.8% of corpus
Modification rate
100%
+52pp above baseline
Role split
100%C/0%P
Creator vs Producer share of appearances

Corpus profile

How Altiuz Reports shows up in HTPBE? corpus

Altiuz Reports is one of the PDF-handling tools surfaced in the HTPBE? corpus. Altiuz Reports appears predominantly as the original Creator (100% of its occurrences) — i.e. on documents that started life inside Altiuz Reports 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 Altiuz Reports 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 Altiuz Reports acts as Creator, 100% carry modification markers; on documents where it acts as Producer, 0% do. These are observed rates inside the HTPBE? corpus and should be read as base-rates, not as accusations against Altiuz Reports or its users.

The signal
In the HTPBE? corpus the contextual signal we look for is a producer/creator mismatch: when Altiuz Reports 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 Altiuz Reports 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 · 100%
As Producer · 0%P
CAs Creator
  • Usage
    362
  • Modification rate
    100%
  • Avg file size
    49 KB
PAs Producer
  • Usage
    0
  • Modification rate
    0%

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.

Related profiles

Tools you’ll see next to Altiuz Reports

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

P66% co-occurrence
iText
Appearances1,704
Mod rate45%

Long tail

Notable observations

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

Pages parsed
362
Oldest observed
10 Apr 2026 — about 1 month 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 →