Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!vax1.cc.lehigh.edu!cert.sei.cmu.edu!krvw
From: p1@arkham.wimsey.bc.ca (Rob Slade)
Newsgroups: comp.virus
Subject: Re: PKLITE and hidden virus (PC)
Message-ID: <0014.9103251532.AA25003@ubu.cert.sei.cmu.edu>
Date: 23 Mar 91 01:56:35 GMT
Sender: Virus Discussion List <VIRUS-L@LEHIIBM1>
Lines: 19
Approved: krvw@sei.cmu.edu

mrs@netcom.COM (Morgan Schweers) writes:

>     As a general policy, do you think that it would be better to warn
> users that a file is PKLITE'ed and unscanable or to simply ignore it?
> Another problem is that PKWare is planning on coming out with a
> 'professional' version of the program which includes an encryption
> portion that can not be -X'ed.

In INtegrity, I have been asked many times to make all files
"self-extracting".  I have consistently refused on the grounds that
self-extracting files are an undesirable and unnecessary security risk.


=============
Vancouver          p1@arkham.wimsey.bc.ca   | You realize, of
Institute for      Robert_Slade@mtsg.sfu.ca | course, that these
Research into      (SUZY) INtegrity         | new facts do not
User               Canada V7K 2G6           | coincide with my
Security                                    | preconceived ideas