Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!inesc!jmc
From: jmc@inesc.UUCP (Miguel Casteleiro)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Virus
Keywords: you've, gotta, be, kidding
Message-ID: <646@inesc.UUCP>
Date: 12 Apr 90 00:41:21 GMT
References: <9004061744.AA13588@jade.berkeley.edu> <444@oregon.oacis.org>
Organization: INESC - Inst. Eng. Sistemas e Computadores, LISBOA. PORTUGAL.
Lines: 24

In article <444@oregon.oacis.org>, jmeissen@oregon.oacis.org (John Meissen) writes:
< In article <9004061744.AA13588@jade.berkeley.edu> C503719@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU ("Baird McIntosh") writes:
<   [stuff deleted]
< >hope that my assessment is incorrect.  In any case, I don't think there is a
< >way in software to write to a write-protected disk; the hardware won't allow
< >this type of write to occur (which is perfectly reasonable and expected).
< >
< Unfortunately, the write protect mechanism involves an optical detector. If the
< light source is not functioning it is the same as write-enabling the disk. A
< defective drive will allow writing to a protected disk.
< Proper fail-safe design would have reversed the modes, so that a closed tab 
< meant write-protect. A failure in that case would mean a default
< of write-protect.

  Yes, indeed. And if you want to take the Amiga to an exposition and you want
to jam the drive so nobody can copy software from the hard-disk, it's a mess.
It would be much more simple to jam the drive if a closed tab means write-protect.


-- 
                                                                      __
 Miguel Casteleiro at                                            __  ///
 INESC, Lisboa, Portugal.     "A known signal conveys no         \\\/// Only
 UUCP: ...!mcsun!inesc!jmc     information." - A. Bruce Carlson   \XX/ Amiga