1996-02-05 - RE: Don’t type your yes/fraud response into your computer

Header Data

From: “A. Padgett Peterson, P.E. Information Security” <PADGETT@hobbes.orl.mmc.com>
To: jpp@software.net
Message Hash: 78b612ef80b1ae0ead363dda71cb91a32cf355b36b11d62355d5e95dd1ec64ae
Message ID: <960204190820.2020e029@hobbes.orl.mmc.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-02-05 02:05:08 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 10:05:08 +0800

Raw message

From: "A. Padgett Peterson, P.E. Information Security" <PADGETT@hobbes.orl.mmc.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 10:05:08 +0800
To: jpp@software.net
Subject: RE: Don't type your yes/fraud response into your computer
Message-ID: <960204190820.2020e029@hobbes.orl.mmc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>Nice try - but the virtual machine model used by intel supports interception
>of I/O operations. 

(something educating prior generations how to apply a near vacuum to shelled
embryos).

Sure it does - why it is essential for protective activity to begin while
the system is still in REAL mode following boot. Might also need to write
a .VXD (horrors)

>I still think the basic 'if the machine is not secure all bets are off'
>premis stands.

Oh I agree, just believe that software can make a machine secure (or at
least detect when security cannot be assured which is almost as good). 

Might I suggest you take a look at the "safe PC" discussions on Virus-L c.a
1989-1990. We were talking about virus protection then but is the same
thing. Believe it or not, we even had real and protected mode discussions
back in those days while we were waiting for Noah (only guy who ever took
out a cattle boat and wound up half-way up a mountain...).

					Warmly,
						Padgett





Thread