Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!sugar!karl
From: karl@sugar.uu.net (Karl Lehenbauer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: The ultimate fix!!!
Message-ID: <2771@sugar.uu.net>
Date: 8 Oct 88 15:47:03 GMT
References: <681@zehntel.UUCP> <3084@hermes.ai.mit.edu> <4197@thorin.cs.unc <9764@cup.portal.com>
Organization: Sugar Land Unix - Houston, TX
Lines: 24

Let's just say, and I think Peter's point was, that it is at least more 
difficult to infect and subvert a Unix system than it is to do so on almost all
of the prevalent personal computers which do not provide protection of any
kind.

Damage from a virus/trojan/etc could be significantly reduced on a Unix system
by running new programs from a special signon that doesn't own anything 
important that could be lost.

Once a user accepts any binary-only program and starts using it, they are of
course vulnerable to that program doing things to them: it executes with their
file permissions.  If the superuser runs the program, the system is of course 
blown wide open.

A lot of people make a big deal about having the source as protection
against virii/trojans, and I will agree that it helps, but who really 
inspects all the source they pull off the net closely enough to insure
that it isn't doing something "funny?"

Testing doesn't insure against malicious software, either, as time delays
are trivial to construct.
-- 
-- "If it's soft and hard to find, it's wimpy!"  -- Wimpy's Software
-- uunet!sugar!karl, Unix BBS (713) 438-5018