Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:13189 comp.sources.wanted:3618 Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!umix!umich!mibte!gamma!ulysses!thumper!faline!bellcore!wind!tr From: tr@wind.bellcore.com (tom reingold) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.sources.wanted Subject: Is PKX35B35.EXE safe? (Was: pkxarc wanted) Message-ID: <6133@bellcore.bellcore.com> Date: 15 Mar 88 01:06:01 GMT References: <1053@ur-tut.UUCP> <465@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> <731@gethen.UUCP> <5297@swan.ulowell.edu> <795@gethen.UUCP> Sender: news@bellcore.bellcore.com Reply-To: tr@wind.UUCP (tom reingold) Organization: Bellcore, Morristown, Noo Joizy Lines: 49 Summary: The name PKX35A35.EXE is meaningful but PKX35B35.EXE is not. In article <795@gethen.UUCP> farren@gethen.UUCP (Michael J. Farren) writes: $A word of explanation: when I made the above posting, I was unaware of $the existence of a Trojan PKARC. The version that I've been using, $PKX35B35, was downloaded from a local BBS system which maintains very $tight control over it's downloads. I've NEVER downloaded a Trojan from $there, and likely never will. PKX35B35.EXE, *as I received it*, works fine. $That does NOT mean that there are no Trojan versions out there, and a call to $Phil Katz's BBS system confirmed that there is NO PKX35B35 authorized $by him, so I would have to agree - do not use PKX35B35.EXE, as you may $not get a version as benign as the one I got. I've removed PKX35B35.EXE $from my BBS as a precaution. $ $[...] $ $-- $Michael J. Farren | "INVESTIGATE your point of view, don't just ${ucbvax, uunet, hoptoad}! | dogmatize it! Reflect on it and re-evaluate $ unisoft!gethen!farren | it. You may want to change your mind someday." $gethen!farren@lll-winken.llnl.gov ----- Tom Reingold, from alt.flame [ I am flattered that you quote me in your .signature :-). ] The letters in the name of the distribution have meaning. It makes me confused as to why someone would upload to a BBS a good version with a "hacked" file name. PKX35A35.EXE: PK = Phil Katz X35 = version 3.5 of pkXarc A35 = version 3.5 of pkarc . = dot EXE = you all know what eeks means So since there is no program named PKBRC, there should never be a file called PKXnnBmm.EXE (where the n's and m's are digits). I would always expect the files to be called PKXnnAmm.EXE, where the nn and mm may or may not be the same numbers. They are in this case but have not always been in the past. I know that Michael meant no harm. How could he if he quotes me in his .signature? But I just wanted to show the pattern I have discerned. Tom Reingold INTERNET: tr@bellcore.bellcore.com Bell Communications Research UUCP: rutgers!bellcore!tr 435 South St room 2L350 SOUNDNET: (201) 829-4622 [work] Morristown, NJ 07960 (201) 287-2345 [home]