🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <173C2CABAS86.FLAVELL@cernvm.cern.ch>,
FLAVELL@cernvm.cern.ch (Alan J Flavell) wrote:

>In article <AC079DA5966895A87@cara.demon.co.uk>
>peter@cara.demon.co.uk (Peter Ceresole) writes:
> 
>>Couldn't it be a postscript file? I seem to remember that postscript files
>>*can* do evil things when run.
> 
>That's not because it's postscript, but because postscript is an
>executable program.

Yes, that's what I meant,
 
>But these risks are not specific to files retrieved by WWW.

Sure, but aren't there circumstances where a browser will display a
postscript file automatically, using a helper app. such as GhostScript?
That would be a risk peculiar to WWW. Other ways of getting the file would
give you more time to be suspicious before running it, or let you run it in
a safe place.

That's what I was thinking of, although I have my Ghostscript set to "safe"
which is, I presume, an option in any postscript interpreter.

>p.s one of the more effective recent viruses has been a "mind" virus.

Good news. Not very...

Peter