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.

Product

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

Developers

  • API Reference
  • GitHub/docs
  • Changelogv2.23.1

Resources

  • FAQ
  • Blog
  • Comparisons
  • Legal & Imprint

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

Status

Algorithm v2.23.1

Tool profile

VBMS-C

VBMS-C 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 2 appearances across the HTPBE? corpus.

Modification rate
100%+52pp above baseline
Corpus baseline: 48%
Total appearances
2
0.10% of corpus
Modification rate
100%
+52pp above baseline
Role split
100%C/0%P
Creator vs Producer share of appearances

Corpus profile

How VBMS-C shows up in HTPBE? corpus

VBMS-C is one of the PDF-handling tools surfaced in the HTPBE? corpus. VBMS-C appears predominantly as the original Creator (100% of its occurrences) — i.e. on documents that started life inside VBMS-C 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 VBMS-C 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 VBMS-C 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 VBMS-C or its users.

The signal
In the HTPBE? corpus the contextual signal we look for is a producer/creator mismatch: when VBMS-C 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 VBMS-C 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
    2
  • Modification rate
    100%
  • Avg file size
    909 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 VBMS-C

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

P100% co-occurrence
iText
Appearances1,717
Mod rate46%

Long tail

Notable observations

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

Pages parsed
34
Oldest observed
7 Apr 2025 — about 1 year 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 →