Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bbn!oberon!pollux.usc.edu!papa
From: papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Virus spread due to piracy?  Huh?
Message-ID: <6024@oberon.USC.EDU>
Date: 5 Jan 88 21:47:43 GMT
References: <2264@crash.cts.com> <2033@gryphon.CTS.COM> <1860@s.cc.purdue.edu>
Sender: nobody@oberon.USC.EDU
Reply-To: papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa)
Organization: Felsina Software, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 28

In article <1860@s.cc.purdue.edu> ain@s.cc.purdue.edu.UUCP (Patrick White) writes:
>
>   But, the virus is *not* spread due to piracy -- is is spread via an
>infected disk.  Is is in no way related to the act of piracy (except for
>the coincidental fact that a pirated disk *may* be infected).

Not coincidental.  Pirated disks (disks copied with Marauder, Mirror or any
other bit copier) are by default bootable.  Which means, they are the ones
more prone to get infected and spread the infection.  As I said before, non
bootable disks CANNOT spread the SCA virus or its current variations.  This
does not mean that non-bootable disks are safe from FUTURE viruses.

>   It may have been first spread via a pirated disk, but that is
>irrelevant now.
>
>   So, please don't make the equation: piracy == virus.

From looking at the various messages on Usenet, BIX and various BBSs, the
general consensus seems to be:

"get pirated software = take the chance to get infected"

If you got infected, and did NOT get it from a pirated disk, you can thank
the pirates that spread it in the first place.

Again, until Bill Koester' new Vcheck 2.0 comes out, try to be careful.

-- Marco