Skip to main content
Participating Frequently
November 14, 2009
Question

Adobe Reader 9 - proxy authentication

  • November 14, 2009
  • 6 replies
  • 38027 views

Since updating to AR9 when checking for updates an "Adobe Reader Updater" window appears indicating that "proxy authentication is required" and asking for username and password,  which on adding the (full) name and password for our proxy redisplays the window.

On cancelling you get the error 1400.

What / Whose proxy is this ?  How do you set it ?

Thanks

    This topic has been closed for replies.

    6 replies

    Participant
    January 9, 2010

    Tried to install a new version of Reader, to access downloaded IRS forms.  Followed all prompts until I got to a popup asking for my password.  No such password is available, and so installation was aborted.  This sounds like it might be related to authentifications others report here.  Any simple fix?

    Adobe Employee
    January 23, 2010

    We were able to fix Eur0star1 problem with proxy authentication for Acrobat and Reader 9.2 on Windows in the Beta program.

    Unfortunately we do not have a solution with proxy authentication for MCHeath on the Macintosh for Acrobat and Reader.

    We need more info from j_gurley to figure out your issue. Did you try downloading 9.3 version of Reader from http://get.adobe.com/reader/otherversions/ ? Are you on Mac or Windows? Are you Administrator or Standard user?

    -Tupper

    Participant
    April 21, 2010

    Seems that the problem lies in the Enhanced Security feature under Security (Enhanced).  I turned it off under preferences and was able to install the update for Acrobat Reader 9.2/9.3.  Previously, I had been receiving a failed to install error with error code 1400.  One of the errors stated that it was unable to access a local file under my documents.  I turned the settings back to use Enhanced Security features after the successful install.

    Message was edited by: smackrobat

    January 5, 2010

    It's the same thing on a Mac, Adobe Updater asks for authentication for the proxy. But ignores it when it gets it, and keeps asking.

    ...and this affects all adobe applications on my Mac, not just adobe reader, so my CS4 Master Collection cannot get any updates

    Participant
    November 27, 2009

    I'm having the same problem here ... identical to what Eur0star1 is having.

    A workaround would be nice.

    Chris.

    Adobe Employee
    December 1, 2009

    Can you send Chris an invitation for the 9.2 Beta please?

    Chris, can you provide us with a direct email address and company name please?

    -Tupper

    Participant
    November 19, 2009

    The Adobe Updater is attempting to bypass the standard ISA client authentication by initiating a connection as an Anonymous User rather than allowing the client to connect as a domain member.  Why this would be designed this way is another question.

    Do not change the Proxy settings on your clients, it will have no effect on the Adobe Updater and may disable other functions - you know, the ones that were properly written.

    You will need to create a new ISA rule allowing all users in the protected network access to either a created URL set or Domain set as shown below, whichever you prefer.

    Domain set --

    adobe.com

    *.adobe.com

    URL set --

    http://armmf.adobe.com:443

    http://crl.adobe.com/*

    http://swumpf.adobe.com/*

    https://armmf.adobe.com:443

    https://crl.adobe.com/*

    https://swumpf.adobe.com/*

    Participant
    November 20, 2009

    Of course, doing that totally undermines the reason for using a proxy server in the first place. I think we will just wait until the next update comes along to see if that fixes the authentication problem.

    Participant
    November 20, 2009

    Well, I don't see the level of certainty you envision as being a matter "of course" for all situations.  Whether or not the rules "totally," or even minimally, undermine the proxy's purpose would depend on its intended role, how you implement this (or any) rule, and what other security/isolation measures you have in place.  Each administrator would have to make his or her own determination.

    While I don't see how granting access through a newly implemented rule is any more of a hazard than your preferred utilization of access already granted through existing rule; I can suggest that use of the URL set would certainly grant tighter privileges than would use of the Domain set, which is why I offered both.

    Again, YMMV.

    Participant
    November 19, 2009

    We have run into the same problem here. And no amount of checking, or unchecking, or changing the Internet settings solves the problem. We did some testing and found that this does not affect machines running Windows 2003, but does affect XP. It also was not an issue before updating to version 9.2. We did a packet capture of the data after the update and it shows our proxy server answering that it needs credentials passed to it. We then tested on an XP box with 9.0 installed and you could access the updates fine. Update it to 9.2 and it quits working. Install 9.2 on its own and it still doesn't work. As far as we can tell, 9.2 is not sending the credentials along with its request no matter what you put in the settings.

    Participating Frequently
    November 14, 2009

    In your Internet Explorer menu select
    Tools->Internet Options->Connections Tab->LAN settings button
    In the Local Area Network (LAN) Settings dialog uncheck Proxy server
    It may take a few minutes for your changes to take effect - do not start "Check for updates" too soon.

    Eur0star1Author
    Participating Frequently
    November 16, 2009

    Sorry, that does not solve the problem.

    Additional information:

    This is a PC running Windowes XP SP3 connected through a Small Business Server 2003 R2 using ISA 2004.

    pwillener
    Legend
    November 16, 2009

    Eur0star1 wrote:

    Sorry, that does not solve the problem.

    How does it not solve your problem - have you unchecked the Proxy Server option, or was it not checked at all?