Secunia
Login
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Thread: SA39291 vs. Foxit 3.1.4.xxx
You are currently viewing a forum thread in the Secunia Community Forum. Please note that opinions expressed here are not of Secunia but solely reflect those of the user who wrote it.This thread was submitted in the following forum:
Programs
|
Relating to this vendor: Foxit Corporation |
And, this specific program: Foxit Reader 3.x |
| aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa | SA39291 vs. Foxit 3.1.4.xxx |
|---|---|
 |
17th Apr, 2010 10:04 |
|
Ranking: -5 Posts: 41 User Since: 15th Dec, 2008 System Score: 100% Location: N/A |
Foxit Reader vendor nowhere claims the version 3.1.4.xxx version of its Foxit Reader was affected by vulnerability as that one in SA39291. Exact this version only installed on our machines. Anyhow, PSI claims our Foxit Reader was vulnerable. It claims it is vulnerability as described in SA39291. Why does psi uses inaccurate data? |
| Maurice Joyce | RE: SA39291 vs. Foxit 3.1.4.xxx | ||||||||
|
17th Apr, 2010 14:42 | ||||||||
| Score: 10510 Posts: 8,072 User Since: 4th Jan 2009 System Score: 100% Location: UK Last edited on 17th Apr, 2010 16:52 |
The latest version of Foxit is: 3.2.1.0401. The download link & details are here: http://www.filehippo.com/download_foxit/changelog/ This fixes the security isuue in 3.1.4.1125 If this post has solved your problem could you please select the ACCEPT option. This will lock the thread and stop you & I from receiving unnecessary update emails. -- Maurice Windows 7 SP1 64 Bit OS HP Intel Pentium i7 IE 10 for Windows 7 16GB RAM |
||||||||
|
|||||||||
| RE: SA39291 vs. Foxit 3.1.4.xxx | [+] |
|
| This reply has been minimised due to a negative Relevancy Score. | ||
| Maurice Joyce | RE: SA39291 vs. Foxit 3.1.4.xxx | ||||||||
|
|
18th Apr, 2010 00:08 | ||||||||
| Score: 10510 Posts: 8,072 User Since: 4th Jan 2009 System Score: 100% Location: UK Last edited on 18th Apr, 2010 00:39 |
I only give out safe download links. CNet,FileHippo & Tucow are very well known as safe,fast & reliable & have no intention of changing that to please U. It is also clear from this post & others from U that your constant challenging of Secunia scans has a lot to do with your total lack of knowledge or ability to find a simple update on a vendors site. Having claimed U are fully up to date I find U have two updates missing!! In the UK we call your reply "Shooting The Messenger". Time to revisit this thread http://secunia.com/community/forum/thread/show/954... Surprised U are still around if that is how U feel. -- Maurice Windows 7 SP1 64 Bit OS HP Intel Pentium i7 IE 10 for Windows 7 16GB RAM |
||||||||
|
|||||||||
| aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa | RE: SA39291 vs. Foxit 3.1.4.xxx | ||||||||
|
|
18th Apr, 2010 14:19 | ||||||||
| Score: -5 Posts: 41 User Since: 15th Dec 2008 System Score: 100% Location: N/A |
Please apologize my strong protesting about 3rd party link. For normal user it is confusing. If it is true you told regarding affected versions show me an open SA for Foxit Reader 3.1.x please. Open SA without fix from vendor. If it is true you told regarding affected versions please show me a vendors statement with content of same meaning. Good communication is the basic issue. But don't worry, not only Secunia sucks regarding this question. This is an illness in plenty areas of "modern" live. Only pc freaks, non-profession pc freaks, can and will spend hours for researching question addressed here. One of hundreds/thousands questions to be researched. Normal user needs straight information, in short form and accurate. |
||||||||
|
|||||||||
