Safari 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 statisticsForensic verdictBased on 6 appearances across the HTPBE? corpus.
Corpus profile
Safari is one of the PDF-handling tools surfaced in the HTPBE? corpus. Safari appears predominantly as the original Creator (100% of its occurrences) — i.e. on documents that started life inside Safari 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 Safari 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 Safari acts as Creator, 50% 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 Safari or its users.
Role in the workflow
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.
Distributions
The PDF versions Safari writes when acting as Producer, and the other tools that appear in the same documents.
Related profiles
Other tools that frequently share metadata with Safari in the same documents. Each card links to its own forensic profile.
Long tail
Smaller cuts of the Safari corpus — useful context, but treat each row as a single data point rather than a strong signal.
Create your account — API key on signup, free test environment on every plan.
From $15/mo. No sales call. Cancel any time.