Make a secure pdf unsecure

[jmt111]

Is it possible to make a secure pdf unsecure using Adobe Acrobat Pro?

Basically, I am trying to add text using the Edit Document Text tool, but I cannot and I believe it is because it is secure.

[Bernd Alheit]

What did you see in the security settings of the document?

[Bill12]

If you know it is secured for editing, then you will have to change the security setting to none first. That means you have to have the password. Once you have turned the security off, you can do minor edits to the PDF and then just reset the security.

[jmt111]

When I open the file, “(SECURED)” is displayed to the right of the file name on the top horizontal bar. Does this mean it is secure?

If so, is there any other way to unsecure it if I do not know the password? I have tried printing it to a new pdf but could not.

[Bernd Alheit]

Ask the creator of the document for the password.

[jmt111]

I can remove the security feature by writing (printing) the pdf to a new pdf using [ XXXXX ]. Acrobat does not allow me to write this particular pdf to a new pdf. It may be because of a security feature.

[Bernd Alheit]

Yes, Adobe software respects the security settings.

[Dave Merchant]

These forums do not permit discussions about how to bypass the security features applied by Adobe software.

[jmt111]

I don't believe the security feature was applied by Adobe software. It came like that by the company. They could have used any pdf software to make the pdf secure. And the only way I will be able to get my signature on it is to either make it unsecure or to use software other than Adobe Acrobat.

[Daniel Flavin]

Security is not added to a PDF document without explicitly doing so.

The creator performed this action, and holds rights to the document (intellectual and copyright).

I would think twice about

1. posting how one circumvented their security

2. attaching my signature to such a document.

my 2 cents

[jmt111]

A creator does not necessarily hold intellectual rights or the copyright to a pdf he
created. Anyone can open a document on any web page and write it to pdf. That
does not mean he holds rights to the contents therein. People can create pdfs
of others’ work, or of work in the public domain without acquiring any
copyright to the materials therein.

I find nothing wrong, immoral or unethical about discussing how to attach a signature
to a secured pdf. I am required to sign pdfs all of the time. Is it immoral to
explore ways to save time, money, electricity, ink and trees by adding a
signature to a document rather than printing every document I have to execute,
then sign it, and have to rescan it? Or have to drive three miles down to the
nearest Kinko’s and waste time and money because I cannot afford a scanner or
do not want to spend $70 + tax on the cheapest model I am able to find?

[try67]

Whatever the reasons were, they obviously did not want you to edit this file in any way, including signing it (or they would have allowed it).

There are ways around any type of security, of course, but this is not the place to discuss it, as was mentioned earlier.

[Phillip_M_Jones]

First, I 'm not into cracking files so that I can sign them. But just because you put copyright on a Document doesn't mean its so. I have several Photo editing Programs that actually can put the word copy right on the image. But just because it can but put there each of those pieces would have to registered with copyright office. You can't just say oh that's copywritten. it has to be backed up with some proof. If I were a Pro Photographer with a Business license I would have some copyright document  in the Copyright Office. Then and only then could I leagally put the word copyright on my photo's.

[Dave Merchant]

Adobe does not promote, endorse or discuss any methods whose primary purpose would be to infringe copyright and violate national laws, and all their software is designed to respect explicit copyright protection measures, irrespective of how they were applied. You can export an unsecured PDF file to Word and paste it into your latest novel; that's a problem between you and the owner's lawyers - but if they've added protection we have to assume on the balance of probability that it was done for valid reasons.

It doesn't matter why you want to do this or where your specific document came from. If we told you how to do it, we would be also telling everyone else who finds this site via Google - and most of them will be trying to steal content. That would make Adobe liable for promoting copyright infringement.

[jmt111]

Everything Dave Merchant has said is reasonable and I have nothing against protecting intellectual property or copyright. But I am not talking about unsecuring a pdf in order to
copy content. I am talking about adding an image filee to a pdf so that it can
contain my signature.

I do not doubt that the ingenuity of Adobe engineers cannot find a way to protect the contents of a document, prevent them from being copied, altered, etc., while still allowing a third party user to add a signature to that document. I cannot see how anybody is harmed by allowing a
signature on a document, and surely there can be a nuanced approach to
protecting intellectual property without banning all modifications to a document.

I am also discouraged in having discovered that Bluebeam Revu is also taking an approach similar to Adobe. With Revu v7, I was able to add my signature to secured documents. Now, with v11, which I just spent a lot of money on, I can do nothing but view a secured document. That’s another pdf company that is not taking a nuanced approach to pdf protection …

[try67]

I cannot see how anybody is harmed by allowing a

signature on a document, and surely there can be a nuanced approach to

protecting intellectual property without banning all modifications to a document.

There is, and it was left to the *author* of the document to decide what they want to allow and want they don't want, not to the user. That would be a very silly approach indeed.

[jmt111]

You mean a document author can prohibit, for example, modifying or copying the text of a document but allow a user to add an image to a document?

[try67]

Yes, they can allow the user to insert an image into a button field but prohibit other actions like copying text.

Edit: A much better option, by the way, is to sign a document digitally, not by adding an image. This too can be allowed by the author.

[jmt111]

OK--then I guess my critique is misdirected. It should be directed towards companies that send these documents with blanket restrictions on them. I just got eight documents of many dozen pages needing to be signed or initialed and I do not look forward to having to scan each of these signed / initialed pages individually ...

[try67 · Accepted solution]

Now you're getting our point... You should contact those companies and ask them to relax their policies and allow you to sign the documents digitally or via a form field.

[Megan5D86]

This was driving me INSANE. I accidentally added a signature that secured my document and it wouldn't let me do ANYTHING. Export it as a WORD document then delete the signature... then save as a PDF. Then it should be FIXED. Usually, I don't share my resolution but I feel this will save headaches lol.

[try67]

If you signed it then you can easily remove it, too.