I think at best it should be up to the distribution to decide to enable additional security features, which is where most common users will get Wine from. Maybe display a warning on the download page?
(Gah, Reply to all, sorry Marcel.) JL On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 3:14 AM, Marcel Partap <mpar...@gmx.net> wrote: >> What about having to mark the exe as +x before Wine will load it? That's >> easilly doable frame any sane filemanager and provides a good level of >> safety.. and Wine already does a good job of making sure installed programs >> get +x. > Wow it actually does, never noticed that up to now :O > The problem would be with one of the more common use case: trying to > start/install a program from an optical disc. The files will not be > marked +x and the directories not be writable. > This problem scenario is also rather specific to WiNE; not an issue > for KDE f.e. whcih yesterday had a related change committed: .desktop > files have to be marked as executable to be run on click now. Lively > discussion about that is still ongoing on kde-core-devel. > > Despite from the install-from-cdrom issue, few users that have (been) > switched from windows to linux will know how to chmod +x a file, so > wine would at least have to give them a hint (or even a button) to do > it. But once it becomes easy, they will just get used to clicking it > and not be consciously pondering if the action is safe or not. So > while i think it'd make sense, i doubt it is a practical solution to > require files to have the executable bit. > > Maybe a better solution would be to introduce an optional dependency > on ClamAV and tight integration with it - known malware could be > filtered and distributors would have greater interest in contributing > to continuous ClamAV signature updates.. > > regards marcel. > > > > -- > "Obstacles are those frightful things you see when you take > your eyes off your goal." -- Henry Ford (1863-1947) > > Change the world! Vote: http://hfopi.org/vote-future > > > -- Adys
