From: leonardr@netcom.com (Leonard Rosenthol)
Subject: Another answer  Re: Virus vs disk compression
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 17:04:21 GMT

In article <ldkttrINNq7@dimebox.cs.utexas.edu> werner@cs.utexas.edu (Werner Uhrig) writes:
> Jim.Kauffman@f20.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Jim Kauffman) writes:
>
>>...an article suggesting that "While any disk compacting utility, 
>>such as Disk Doubler, or Auto-Doubler, is active, your Virus protection 
>>software is rendered virtually useless." I will assume by this statement 
>>that they mean to include other utilities such as More Disk Space, 
>>SpaceSaver, and others as well.
>
>> Can anyone offer authoritative refutation or confirmation?
>
>	I suspect part of the problem is either in poor presentation
>	of the problem context, or poor understanding of the problem
>	(or both) by the author of the Information Systems newsletter
>	article...
>
	This is true, and I could not agree more...

>	...on one hand, when a file is "compressed" (stuffed), it isn't
>	easy for anti-virals to protect the (now data, and not executable)
>	file (resource forks) from "getting modified" - if for no other
>	reason than that the anti-virals don't usually try to protect
>	data-files....
>
        This is also true, however StuffIt provides users the ability to
have files checked for viruses as they are unstuffed/extracted from the
archive - therefore significatly reducing the chance of viral infection from
compressed data.

>	on the other hand, a lot of those compacting utilities are so
>	poor in design and concept as to make (some) anti-virals useless
>	(because they were not designed and executed to be compatible with
>	the older - and certainly more important - anti-virals).
>
	I don't know of which you speak, but I do know that StuffIt Lite/Deluxe
as well as our new transparent compression product, StuffIt SpaceSaver, work
just beautifully with anti-viral products!!

>The best compression technique is compression at the disk driver level.
>Golden Triangle has one such, and I know of at least one more company
>with one just about ready.  This technique avoids many of the nasty
>patching strategies currently in use by many of the compression utilities.
>
	This is a different topic than the above, but let me say that you may
not be as impressed after you have tried them.  They have different problems 
than the current crop of transparent compressors, and are VERY difficult to 
"back out of".  It will be interesting to see user reaction/experience with
thses when they do ship.

>Most of them I've seen so far are hacks.  They use the system in
>less-than-compatible ways.  Some of them use unsupported internal
>system mechanisms.  These vendors should be ashamed of themselves.
>
	This is a pretty inflammatory statement and I would like to see
this one backed up across the board.  Yes, SOME companies do use unsupported
things, but MOST do not..Hell, StuffIt SpaceSaver is the ONLY one of the
transparent compression products that runs under System 7.1 WITHOUT CHANGE!!

>The cheap attempts by these vendors to characterize one category of
>software as of no consequence deserve to be challenged.  If they are
>unable to achieve compatibility, they must take responsibility for
>their inability rather than pointing the finger of blame at other vendors.
> 
	Now that I agree with - for ANY type of software!!  If your product
has compatibility problems, it is your responsiblity to find out why - and
if it is the fault of another, let them know and help them fix it!  I've spent
more time crawling around in other people's code to find incompatibilities
on some days that I spend on my own...Ask me about the guts of Print Monitor
someimte ;)


-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard Rosenthol			Internet: 	leonardr@netcom.com
Director of Advanced Technology		AppleLink:	MACgician
Aladdin Systems, Inc.			GEnie:		MACgician

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc