Two questions decide everything here, and they have completely different answers. Can you open the file at all? If yes, the restrictions on it are trivially removable and always have been. If no, and you do not have the password, then with a decent password nothing short of guessing it will get you in, and every service promising otherwise is either exploiting a weak password or lying.
PDF's standard security handler has two passwords and they do different jobs.
The user password is the one you type to open the document. The file's encryption key is derived from it, so without it the content is genuinely inaccessible.
The owner password controls a set of permission flags: may the reader print, copy text, extract pages, fill forms, modify the document. A file can carry these restrictions with no user password at all, which is the common case for a report you can open and read but not copy from.
Here is the part that explains everything else. When there is no user password, the user password is the
empty string, and the encryption key is derived from it. So the file is fully decryptable by anyone,
immediately, with no guessing involved. The permission flags are not enforced by cryptography. They are a
request, written in the file, that conforming readers are expected to honour. Adobe Acrobat honours them.
Plenty of other software does not. qpdf --decrypt will strip them in a second, and that is not
a security exploit; it is the format working as designed.
The practical upshot: permission-only protection prevents nothing. If you need a document not to be readable, you need a user password. If you set permission flags expecting them to stop anybody who can open the file, they will not.
You can remove the restrictions. In rough order of convenience:
qpdf --decrypt input.pdf output.pdf. This
rewrites the file without encryption and without touching the page content, so nothing is re-rendered
and nothing degrades. It is the correct tool for this job.Our own tools are not the answer for this case. The unlock tool asks for a password, so it is built for the encrypted case, and it cannot help you with a file that opens freely but is restricted. Use qpdf.
This is straightforward and every route works.
qpdf --password=yourpassword --decrypt input.pdf output.pdf. The
most predictable option if you have several files to do.Print to PDF also produces an unprotected copy, and it is the worst of the four because it re-renders the document. Use it only if the others are unavailable.
Let us be direct, because a lot of pages on this topic are not. If a PDF has a user password and you do not know it, you cannot open it, and therefore you cannot print it to PDF, convert it, or feed it to any tool. Advice recommending print-to-PDF for a forgotten password is simply wrong: that method requires the file to be open already.
What remains is guessing the password, which recovery software does by trying candidates very quickly. That succeeds or fails entirely on the basis of the password itself. A dictionary word, a name with a year after it, or anything from a list of common passwords will fall quickly. A long random passphrase will not fall at all, and no amount of computing changes that.
So the realistic options are: ask whoever sent you the file, look for the password in the email that delivered it, check whether the same password was used on other files, or, if you set it yourself, check your password manager. If it was important and it is gone, it is gone.
Not the cipher. The password, and the key derivation behind it.
Older PDF encryption, the revision 4 generation that uses AES-128, derives the file key from your password with an MD5-based function and a small number of iterations. That is fast, which means an attacker can test an enormous number of candidate passwords per second. The AES-256 generation, revision 6, uses a hardened SHA-256 based derivation that is deliberately slower to compute, so the same guessing attack proceeds far more slowly.
Two conclusions follow. With a strong password, both are fine. With a weak password, neither is, and the AES-128 file falls considerably faster. If you are protecting something that matters, the passphrase is the variable to spend effort on.
Which brings us to a disclosure about our own protect tool. It applies the standard security handler with AES-128, which is real encryption and will genuinely keep out anyone without the password. But it sets the owner password to the same value as the user password. Since the permission flags are only ever advisory, and since anyone who can open the file now also holds the owner password, the printing and copying switches in our interface do not restrict a determined recipient at all. Treat our protection as "people without the password cannot read this", which it does well, and not as "people with the password cannot print this", which it does not do.
One more practical point that defeats more encryption than any cryptanalysis: do not send the password in a second email. Both messages sit in the same mailbox, so anyone with access to the mailbox has both. Use a different channel, or accept that you have not really protected anything.
Removing protection from a document you created, or one you have been given permission to modify, is not a problem. Two areas need more care than the usual "only unlock what you own" advice suggests:
None of this is legal advice, and where a document matters, ask someone qualified rather than a PDF article.
Enter the password locally in your browser and download an unprotected copy. Neither the file nor the password leaves your device.
Open the unlock toolIf you know the password, any of these work: RaptorPDF's unlock tool, which does it in the browser so neither the file nor the password is transmitted; Acrobat's File, Properties, Security panel set to no security; or qpdf --password=yourpassword --decrypt in.pdf out.pdf on a command line. Print-to-PDF also produces an unprotected copy but re-renders every page, so text can stop being selectable and links are lost.
If it has a user password, no. And because you cannot open it, you also cannot print it to PDF or feed it to any converter, which is why advice suggesting print-to-PDF for a forgotten password is wrong. Password recovery software works only by guessing, so it succeeds against weak or dictionary passwords and fails against a long random one. Ask whoever sent you the file.
The user password is required to open the file, and the encryption key is derived from it, so without it the content is genuinely inaccessible. The owner password controls permission flags for printing, copying and editing. Crucially, when there is no user password the key is derived from an empty string, so the file is fully decryptable by anyone and the flags are only a request that conforming readers are expected to honour. That is why qpdf --decrypt removes restriction-only protection instantly.
It carries owner permission flags. These are not enforced by encryption; they are honoured by readers that choose to. Adobe Acrobat honours them and a lot of other software does not. qpdf --decrypt input.pdf output.pdf removes them without re-rendering the pages, which is the cleanest fix.
Not because of the cipher, but because of the key derivation. The AES-128 generation derives the key from your password with a fast MD5-based function, so a very large number of guesses can be tested per second. The AES-256 generation uses a deliberately slower SHA-256 based derivation, which makes guessing far more expensive. With a long random passphrase both are secure; with a weak password the AES-128 file falls much faster. The password is the variable that matters.
For a document you created or have permission to modify, generally yes. Two cautions: many jurisdictions have anti-circumvention rules that make bypassing a technological protection measure on a copyrighted work unlawful in itself, which affects purchased ebooks and licensed reports regardless of what you intend to do with the content; and a password on a work document may exist to satisfy a contractual or regulatory obligation, so removing it can breach that even if you wrote the document. This is not legal advice.