>From: Kai MacTane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>: >: >Emacs is a bad example -- it explicitly asks before executing code.
>: >:
>: >: Like Word then!
>: >
>: >Think about the people you know who use emacs. Now think about the
>people
>: you
>: >know who use word. Is the difference clear to you now?
>:
>: Yeah. It's like some of us have been saying: this is more of a user (and
>: user-education) problem than it is a software problem.
>
>Not really. If Microsoft had taken the time to secure/idiot-proof their
>package, then Macro viruses probably wouldn't exist. The problem is that
>Microsoft markets their software as being "user-friendly", and claims that
>it's very easy to use and learn. If they're going to make these types of
>claims, then they should take proper security precautions to compensate for
>uneducated users.
My car is "user-friendly" and easy to use, so are you saying that if I go
out and drive at 100mph and crash that it's Ford's fault for not limiting
the maximum speed of my car? No it's my duty (as a driver or computer user)
to take precautions and then to take responsibility for my actions. Now if
I'm out driving obeying all the driving laws and I've properly maintained my
car and suddenly the wheel falls off, then the manufacturer is at fault.
The macro virus situation probably falls somewhere in the middle of the
examples before. This is certainly not the first macro virus so our users
should be aware of the potential problem (but how many organizations take
the time to explain this to EVERY computer user?). Also I believe the
default in MS office is to not run macros or at least to warn you before
running them. So the user knows that their might be a problem if they open
the file (as I know that if I'm driving at 100mph I'm at risk).
Blame MS for producing buggy, bloated and poorly designed software but you
surely can't blame them for user actions.
--Dave
