Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!ctrsol!sdsu!polyslo!vlsi3b15!vax1.cc.lehigh.edu!sei.cmu.edu!krvw
From: kerchen@iris.ucdavis.edu (Paul Kerchen)
Newsgroups: comp.virus
Subject: Re: Obj - anti-virus (PC)
Message-ID: <0009.8910301224.AA05511@ge.sei.cmu.edu>
Date: 29 Oct 89 19:56:08 GMT
Sender: Virus Discussion List <VIRUS-L@IBM1.CC.Lehigh.EDU>
Lines: 24
Approved: krvw@sei.cmu.edu

In article <0003.8910271112.AA11335@ge.sei.cmu.edu> s0703pdb@semassu.bitnet (Pa
ul Bienvenue) writes:
>	[stuff about distributing OBJ files as anti-viral technique]
>
>    It's a nice idea, but it wouldn't really stop virus writers, just
>make life a little more difficult for them.

That's the whole point: to make life more difficult for virus writers.
The whole virus problem is NP complete, meaning that there is no way
to ever completely solve it.  For every protection scheme, there is a
way to break it; just look at the copy protection war that has been
going on for years now.  Anyone who's in the virus business (either
attacking or defending) had better know that they can never hope to
create a virus/vaccine which is completely bulletproof.  There will
always be someone on the other side who will figure out a scheme to
counter that virus/vaccine.  Therefore, no solution should ever be
ruled out simply on the basis that it cannot stop virus writers (I
know that this isn`t the only reason Paul gave, but I just wanted
to make this point). Stopping virus writers isn`t going to happen
in software or hardware, but in societal pressure.  (Perhaps some
future first lady will make that her project: viruses--just say no.
:-) )

Paul Kerchen				| kerchen@iris.ucdavis.edu