Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!microsoft!alistair
From: alistair@microsoft.UUCP (Alistair BANKS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2
Subject: Re: Security concerns for OS/2?
Message-ID: <53617@microsoft.UUCP>
Date: 18 Mar 90 17:22:38 GMT
References: <5341@ccncsu.ColoState.EDU>
Reply-To: alistair@microsoft.UUCP (Alistair BANKS)
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 36

I would say that os/2 has + & - compared with DOS regarding viruses.

For the time being, the biggest plus, is that OS/2 is less known about
and less installed so their are likely to be fewer virus creators around
to gain the reduced 'reward'.

More technically, without giving listening virus creators any ideas, os/2
uses the same basic boot mechanism as dos and so is susceptable: BUT,
when it has loaded its device drivers and switched to protect mode, no
clock activated or other interrupt activated code gets a look in.

This is a major plus.

Under os/2 1.X the dos box is not active while you are NOT looking at it,
therefore a DOS virus wont be active while you are using OS/2.

HPFS is new, powerful, and complicated - viruses that use bios
interrupts to attack FAT based file systems wont work.

- (with rider): OS/2 does have neat and reliable multi-tasking, so a rogue
virus process can do its work in the background, but os/2 has a real
process model which the virus would have to be using, and a real
process list command for you to see that virus at work - this would, of
course be for an os/2 virus. Seeing it should allow you to track it down
and kill it, but remember it may have an assumed pseudonym!

Generally, os/2 virus opportunities are more complex and are too new
to have been created.

I dont know of any (yet), but of course, Microsoft would like to hear
of any - even in the making, so that we can help avoid or eradicate
them.

Alistair Banks
OS/2 Group
Microsoft.