Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!vax1.cc.lehigh.edu!cert.sei.cmu.edu!krvw
From: Peter_Urka@ub.cc.umich.edu
Newsgroups: comp.virus
Subject: Hunter-Killer Vaccines
Message-ID: <0010.9008131823.AA10141@ubu.cert.sei.cmu.edu>
Date: 12 Aug 90 00:27:24 GMT
Sender: Virus Discussion List <VIRUS-L@LEHIIBM1>
Lines: 22
Approved: krvw@sei.cmu.edu


	It has recently been suggested in this journal that sending
out 'helpful' viruses that would infect machines and destroy harmful
viruses should be thought about.  I have and have reached these
conclusions: 1) It is a nice (even ethical) thing to do.  2) It would
not help virus programmer's in a technical sense.  If they can write
these things now, new algorithms are but a matter of time. 3) It
should not be done.
	It would be too easy to prey upon the unsuspecting, gullible,
and naive computer jock.  What virus authors wish to do is make people
into suckers and a great way to do that is to write a 'nice' program.
	"Hi.  I am a virus that hunts down others.  A - Happy Hunting.
B - Erase Virus Hunter" The victim presses A and in a few seconds up
pops "Hi.  The joke is on you sucker.  I just erased your hard disk"
	Unfortunately there is a even worse chance of the victim of a
virus attack to determine whether the program is friendly or hostile,
than getting one.  IF THE VICTIM BELIEVES THERE ARE NICE VIRUSES, he
has a 50-50 chance of saying yes to a modified version.  If everybody
has the COMPLETE understanding that all viruses should be treated with
vaccines and disk backups, the above scenario won't happen.
- --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --
Peter Urka@ub.cc.umich.edu