Bug#407063: wine in desktop task?
[ Sorry for the late reply, but ideas don't always flow the way you'd want ]
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:10:14PM +0100, Per Olofsson wrote:
> Robert Millan:
> > But then windows virus and trojans need to know that messing with your
> > c:\windows isn't the right way to damage your system if you're
> > using wine. And if they are actualy going to make wine-aware virus, they
> > could write a bash script as well.
> Even if such malware wouldn't damage the system, it could still do
> things like sending spam and infecting other computers. That would
> probably work in wine.
Now I really wonder, is that *our* problem? It doesn't reflect badly in *our*
users, only in users of Windows. There are ethical reasons why seeking this
would be a bad thing, but working to prevent it, to the point that we have to
give up on legitimate features, is really what we want?
Note that Microsoft themselves don't follow that. They supply full win32
compat in their win64 vapourware OS. This means most viruses will still
work, but they accept that because the cost of not providing win32 compat
would be too high.
If that cost is too high for Microsoft to break compatibility for the sake of
reducing the virus problem *in their own platform*, why would the cost (i.e
letting our users run viruses than can only harm our rivals) be too high for
us to provide this compatibility in our platform?
My spam trap is email@example.com. Note: this address is only intended
for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list.