wine autorun utility

William Knop william.knop at
Fri Jun 30 00:47:23 CDT 2006

On Jun 30, 2006, at 1:08 AM, Troy Rollo wrote:

> On Friday 30 June 2006 14:52, William Knop wrote:
>> Um hold on a second. Clearly many developers have different ideas
>> about what's reasonable.
> Actually I don't think that's true. As far as I can see all of the
> *developers* participating in this thread agreed that autorun (1)  
> is a bad
> idea and should not be implemented, and (2) is on the other side of  
> the
> demarcation line between Wine and the desktop environment.
> I would be surprised if any significant number of developers  
> disagreed with
> these two points. As for the first, it reflects the difference between
> Windows' security model and the Unix/Linux security model (the  
> difference
> being that the latter systems actually have a model deserving of the
> label "security"). As for the second, an end user may well not  
> understand the
> distinction between Wine's role and that of the desktop  
> environment, but a
> developer should. Wine is for making Windows applications (and native
> applications coded to the Windows API) run - I am not aware of any  
> developer
> who thinks it should be a complete reimplementation of Windows.

1) While I agree maintaining a staunch security policy is important,  
that has nothing to do with autorun. Making the user browse to find  
an executable is not security.

2) The line you refer to I believe would put detecting media inserts  
on the desktop environment side, and the parsing and execution of  
windows autorun inf files on the wine side. Hell, the user would have  
to run `wine --media-autorun /mountpoint/autorun.inf`. That has to be  
as secure as the user running `cd /mountpoint/somedir; wine ./some.exe`.


More information about the wine-devel mailing list