From: Lee Laniear (laniear_at_cwo.com)
Date: Mon Oct 14 2002 - 00:56:17 EDT
Thanks for the info,
It seemed logical that being able to "see" files would also allow "seeing" a virus, but I have learned that things
relating to computers are not always logical (at least seemingly so). I would feel better if there were a current
OS/2 anti-viirus program. Of course, like most of the world (except Europe) OS/2 is fading away in my lab.
BTW, one nit to pick, someone earlier said that OS/2 came out ten years ago. Actually it came out fourteen
years ago this month. I was one of the people who paid about $300 for release 1.0 Standard Edition (what a
disappointment) and about $500 for Extended Edition the following January. There were versions 1.1 and 1.3
through 1991 and then the first "reasonable" version (2.0) came in 1992. Then, of course, IBM demonstrated
it's marketing prowess through several feckless marketing campaigns. They thought that the fact (and it was
a fact then) that OS/2 was technically better than windows 3.1 meant that they would "win". I kept reminding
them that the technically superior Betamax wasn't dominating the home VCR market.
Lee
On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 22:34:30 -0600, Aryeh Goretsky wrote:
>Hello,
>
>You are correct, Lee. A virus would not be able to execute under OS/2,
>but it could be transferred to a system where it later could be executed.
>
>Generally speaking, if a Windows (Mac, Linux, OS/2) client can access
>a files on a server, the anti-virus software installed on the client
>should be able to check those files as well. This is actually more an
>issue of file permissions and ownership than one of operating systems.
>
>Many anti-virus program developers provide some way of testing their
>software using a "dummy" file which generates a false positive report.
>One example of this is the EICAR anti-virus test file, which you can
>read about at
>
> http://www.eicar.org/anti_virus_test_file.htm
>
>It's a 68-bye long text file that many anti-virus programs report as
>a real virus in order to allow you to test that your software is
>working. EICAR is a vendor-neutral trade group headquartered in
>Germany.
>
>Regards,
>
>Aryeh Goretsky
>
>
>
>At 04:57 PM 10/13/2002 -0700, Lee Laniear wrote:
>>I have generally assumed that a virus could sit on my OS/2 systems (like
>>this one) and not affect it's operation.
>>I have also assumed that running anti anti-virus program on my windoze
>>systems which also connect to my
>>Warp Server could find and handle a virus on the server. When I have run
>>it it "seems" to be looking through
>>the server drives just as it does my NT and 2000 drives. I have never
>>found a virus on the OS/2 systems, but
>>I haven't found one on the windoze systems either.
>>
>>My question is whether my assumption is correct that an anti-virus program
>>running in windows can actually
>>find a virus on an OS/2 (HPFS) server.
>>
>>Thanks in advance,
>>
>>Lee
>>
>>
>>"Anything worth doing is worth doing for money."
>>13th Ferengi Rule of Acquisition
>>
>>Lee Laniear
>>laniear_at_cwo.com OR
>>laniear_at_alum.mit.edu
>
"Sometimes what you get free costs entirely too much".
218th Ferengi Rule of Acquisition
Lee Laniear
laniear_at_cwo.com OR
laniear_at_alum.mit.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:59:30 EST