__/ [ James J. Dines ] on Monday 06 March 2006 14:27 \__
> d wrote:
>
>> "Beowulf" <beowulf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:pan.2006.03.05.18.41.48.702311@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Try and listen to a RealPlayer song off say amazon and RealPlayer now
>>> installs a file on MS-Windows called hurl.exe that checks for legal
>>> stuff,
>>> etc. Once on the MS-Windows system it can not be deleted, becomes a file
>>> from hell.
>>> http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=hurl.exe&qt_s=Search
>>>
>>> Luckily I simply dual booted into my Mandriva Linux system and ran
>>> Konqueror and zapped that hurl.exe file from hell that Windows would not
>>> let me delete. Incredible, what OS should prevent the owner and user from
>>> choosing to delete files?
>>
>> It's not the operating system. A process is using the file, and has a
>> lock
>> on it. What OS should allow the deletion of an in-use executable? :-P
It usually resides in memory, assuming it is not small.
> You have completely missed the point. The question you should be asking
> is:
>
> 'What OS should allow an application to inject an executable deep into your
> system, that continues to run after the application is closed, even after a
> complete system reboot'
A user-friendly operating system; a cracker-friendly operating system.
|
|
