Greg Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Thursday 31 October 2002 08:10 am, Raul Dias wrote: >> My $0.02, >> >> A way to make it more secure is to catch key API calls and decide if >> the application is allowed to run it or not. > >not a bad idea. > >> Wine could implement a clean Security Layer: YES > >Clean, perhaps, but secure? That depends on what you are trying to >achieve: since the unix API is available to apps running under wine, >such measures will only secure applications which don't specifically >check for wine and circumvent its api-level security measures. > >So, for example, this could be used to protect a system against security >flaws in Internet Exploder or Outlook... but a malicious virus writer >could work around winapi-based security provisions, as discussed >earlier in this thread.
In this case I agree that the OS should provide the security layer, not wine. Wine should provide security only for (or "at least for") WIN32 API flaws. []'s Raul Dias > >-- >gmt > >"The purpose of government is to rein in the rights of the people" > --President Bill Clinton, MTV interview, 1993 >
