DEFMTH1.CVP 911206 Viral Myths - Malice The old saw "it ain't that folks is so ignorant, it's that they know so much that ain't so" is true in the computer virus field as in no other I have ever been involved with. For a variety of reasons, hard facts about computer viral programs are extremely hard to come by, while rumours, innuendo and outright lies abound. The terms "virus" and "damage" are so closely connected in the minds of most computer users that "virus" is now being used to describe any situation in which a computer is damaged, unavailable or simply not doing what the user wants. (This leads to the "Hurricane Hugo Virus", the "I-hit-Exit-and-the- word-processor-stopped Virus" and, the favourite of all technical support people, the "Not-Plugged-In Virus".) By the same token, many users fear *any* viral program, regarding all of them as if they carried the Black Death. The truth is, relatively few viri perform any overt "damage" to a system. Of the hundreds of viral strains, only a small number carry a "payload" intended to corrupt data or erase random files, and these tend to be correspondingly rare in terms of number of infections. Those few viral variants which "destroy" their target files or disks are, by definition, self revealing and self limiting. (Of course, I now have to back pedal by defining "overt" damage. All viral programs make some kind of change to the system. Even those which are designed to be "benign" may cause unforseen problems in new situations. It is quite certain that the author of the "Stoned" virus did not intend any kind of damage to result from its spread; he just never knew anything about RLL disk controllers or high density disks. Most "header" or "integrity" checks in programs were intended only to trap bad copies or disk sectors; they still stop programs from operating if a viral infection occurs. In these days of increasingly multi-layered operating systems and "background" utility programs, the addition of a resident virus is increasingly likely to result in unforseen interactions. It is also important to note that all viri, trojans and hacking/breaking erode, and may ultimately destroy, the trust and community which currently supports so much international research and cooperation on the nets.) If viral programs are not intended to cause damage, why are they written? My personal opinion is that this is a kind of self-reproducing electronic graffiti. Basically, it is an unsightly nuisance, perpetrated by tiny minds in search of some place in life. Most of them don't think they are harming anyone. Most of them don't think. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1991 DEFMTH1.CVP 911206 ============= Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca | "The only thing necessary Institute for Robert_Slade@sfu.ca | for the triumph of evil Research into rslade@cue.bc.ca | is for good men to do User p1@CyberStore.ca | nothing." Security Canada V7K 2G6 | - Edmund Burke