"Dan Kegel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> What's so special about Wine that doesn't apply to say VMWare, >> Parallels, Win4Lin, DOSBox, and others? > > With vmware, parallels, and win4lin, you can actually > run commercial virus scanners inside those environments,
Is it really necessary to require running a virus scanner from inside of Wine? > and everybody knows that one should do that if one > cares about viruses. Same sentence applies to Wine I'd assume. > With DOSBox, well, the target market for that tool is so small > compared to Wine it doesn't matter, they're mostly technical users, > and there isn't much ms-dos malware being written these days. There are thousands of existing DOS viruses, it doesn't matter that nobody writes new ones anymore, there are plenty of them already. > So Wine really is different; you can't run commercial virus > scanners in it, It's still possible to run a native virus scanner outside of Wine. Wine is just a part of underlying system, not a separate environment. > it's for users who aren't technical enough to > be able to find an antivirus solution on their own, That's not different from other environments providing DOS/Windows compatibility. > and > (worst of all) everybody assumes Linux is impervious to viruses. I already answered to this one. >> Probably yes, we could extend the FAQ section about >> security, but that's almost everything we can do. > > I pointed out several other things we could do. > Another one is we could make the wine package list clamav > as a dependency. > > Denying there's a problem, or that we can do anything about it, > might lead to a large number of unhappy users. Nobody denies that there is a problem, the thing is that personally I don't see why that problem is Wine specific. -- Dmitry.
