PDF metadata says the file was created in a browser. is that normal?
Short answer, for anyone who finds this from a search: no. Longer version. A COA from an actual laboratory is exported from instrument software or from a LIMS. The PDF producer string reflects that. What it does not usually say is the name of a web browser, a word processor, or an online PDF editor. The document I am…
This is the cheapest check available and it catches a genuinely surprising amount. The pattern I see most is not a forged report — it is a real report that has been through three hands and had a logo pasted over it.
Which is worth distinguishing, because "reseller re-exported a genuine document" and "somebody generated a document" are very different accusations and this community has to be careful about which one it is making.
yes, and that distinction is why i flaired this Suspicious rather than Confirmed. the metadata is odd. that is all i am claiming.
Correct flair, correct restraint, thank you. For everyone else: this is what an unresolved observation looks like. Confirmed means documentary evidence of the thing you are alleging, not a suspicious field.
We have had to retract two accusations in three years and both times the underlying observation was real and the conclusion drawn from it was not.
and both retractions are still on the source pages, annotated. that is on purpose.
the fact that the retractions stay up is genuinely the reason i trust the rest of the directory.
That is exactly the trade. A record you can edit silently is not a record.