I have a complaint about the website
jave27 at gmail.com
Mon Mar 27 13:56:20 CST 2006
On 3/27/06, Segin <segin2005 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Due to the current state of Wine, plus it's archjitechure, Even if a
> virus was found, it is much easier to remove.
> If the virus is a memory-resident kind, you can do pkill -9 wine as root
> or your user and shut down ile essentially killing said virus.
> A lot of viruses, in order to keep small, attempt to make fnction calls
> based on a DLL function absolute address. This has a 1 in 256 million
> cnahce in working, because each time you recodmile wine, the function
> entry points change. all that aill result in is a segmentation fault.
I agree that running viruses are much more difficult in Wine than in
Windows, however, by default, Wine maps Z:\ to your entire Linux tree.
If the user running Wine has write-access to any other folders in the
Linux system tree and runs a virus which randomly deletes or modifies
files on any accessible drive letter, that is still a problem. Plus,
some users don't use "rm -rf .wine/" on a daily basis like most devs
do, and they may actually store useful things under their .wine/
folder. In the (albeit, unlikely) event of "succesfully" running a
Windows virus, those files are at risk.
There are plenty of distros that install some version of Wine by
default and automatically associate .exe's and the like with Wine, so
users that aren't careful are still at risk. Granted, that risk is
minimized by not being fully compatible with everything Windows does
[yet], but it's still a risk.
More information about the wine-devel