home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Frequently Asked Questions (FAQS);faqs.020
-
-
-
-
- E9) Some people say that disinfecting files is a bad idea. Is that
- true?
-
- Disinfecting a file is completely "safe" only if the disinfecting
- process restores the non-infected state of the object completely. That
- is, not only the virus must be removed from the file, but the original
- length of the file must be restored exactly, as well as its time and
- date of last modification, all fields in the header, etc. Sometimes
- it is necessary to be sure that the file is placed on the same
- clusters of the disk that it occupied prior to infection. If this is
- not done, then a program which uses some kind of self-checking or
- copy protection may stop functioning properly, if at all.
-
- None of the currently available disinfecting programs do all this.
- For instance, because of the bugs that exist in many viruses, some of
- the information of the original file is destroyed and cannot be
- recovered. Other times, it is even impossible to detect that this
- information has been destroyed and to warn the user. Furthermore,
- some viruses corrupt information very slightly and in a random way
- (Nomenklatura, Phoenix), so that it is not even possible to tell which
- files have been corrupted.
-
- Therefore, it is usually better to replace the infected objects with
- clean backups, provided you are certain that your backups are
- uninfected (see D10). You should try to disinfect files only if they
- contain some valuable data that cannot be restored from backups or
- compiled from their original source.
-
-
- E10) Can I avoid viruses by avoiding shareware/free software/games?
-
- No. There are many documented instances in which even commercial
- "shrink wrap" software was inadvertently distributed containing
- viruses. Avoiding shareware, freeware, games, etc. only isolates you
- from a vast collection of software (some of it very good, some of it
- very bad, most of it somewhere in between...).
-
- The important thing is not to avoid a certain type of software, but to
- be cautious of ANY AND ALL newly acquired software. Simply scanning
- all new software media for known viruses would be rather effective at
- preventing virus infections, especially when combined with some other
- prevention/detection strategy such as integrity management of
- programs.
-
-
- E11) Can I contract a virus on my PC by performing a "DIR" of an
- infected floppy disk?
-
- If you assume that the PC you are using is virus free before you
- perform the DIR command, then the answer is no. However, when you
- perform a DIR, the contents of the boot sector of the diskette are
- loaded into a buffer for use when determining disk layout etc., and
- certain anti-virus products will scan these buffers. If a boot sector
- virus has infected your diskette, the virus code will be contained in
- the buffer, which may cause some anti-virus packages to give the
- message "xyz virus found in memory, shut down computer immediately".
- In fact, the virus is not a threat at this point since control of the
- CPU is never passed to the virus code residing in the buffer. But,
- even though the virus is really not a threat at this point, this
- message should not be ignored. If you get a message like this, and
- then reboot from a clean DOS diskette and scan your hard-drive and
- find no virus, then you know that the false positive was caused by the
- fact that the infected boot-sector was loaded into a buffer, and the
- diskette should be appropriately disinfected before use. The use of
- DIR will not infect a clean system, even if the diskette it is being
- performed on does contain a virus.
-
-
- E12) Is there any risk in copying data files from an infected floppy
- disk to a clean PC's hard disk?
-
- Assuming that you did not boot or run any executable programs from the
- infected disk, the answer is generally no. There are two caveats: 1)
- you should be somewhat concerned about checking the integrity of these
- data files as they may have been destroyed or altered by the virus,
- and 2) if any of the "data" files are interpretable as executable by
- some other program (such as a Lotus macro) then these files should be
- treated as potentially malicious until the symptoms of the infection
- are known. The copying process itself is safe (given the above
- scenario). However, you should be concerned with what type of files
- are being copied to avoid introducing other problems.
-
-
- E13) Can a DOS virus survive and spread on an OS/2 system using the
- HPFS file system?
-
- Yes, both file-infecting and boot sector viruses can infect HPFS
- partitions. File-infecting viruses function normally and can activate
- and do their dirty deeds, and boot sector viruses can prevent OS/2
- from booting if the primary bootable partition is infected. Viruses
- that try to directly address disk sectors cannot function because OS/2
- prevents this activity.
-
-
- E14) Under OS/2 2.0, could a virus infected DOS session infect another
- DOS session?
-
- Each DOS program is run in a separate Virtual DOS Machine (their
- memory spaces are kept separated by OS/2). However, any DOS program
- has almost complete access to the files and disks, so infection can
- occur if the virus infects files; any other DOS session that executes
- a program infected by a virus that makes itself memory resident would
- itself become infected.
-
- However, bear in mind that all DOS sessions share the same copy of the
- command interpreter. Hence if it becomes infected, the virus will be
- active in *all* DOS sessions.
-
-
- E15) Can normal DOS viruses work under MS Windows?
-
- Most of them cannot. A system that runs exclusively MS Windows is,
- in general, more virus-resistant than a plain DOS system. The reason
- is that most resident viruses are not compatible with the memory
- management in Windows. Furthermore, most of the existing viruses will
- damage the Windows applications if they try to infect them as normal
- EXE files. The damaged applications will stop working and this will
- alert the user that something is wrong.
-
- However, virus-resistant is by no means virus-proof. For instance,
- most of the well-behaved resident viruses that infect only COM files
- (Cascade is an excellent example), will work perfectly in a DOS
- window. All non-resident COM infectors will be able to run and infect
- too. And currently there exists at least one Windows-specific virus
- which is able to properly infect Windows applications (it is
- compatible with the NewEXE file format).
-
- Any low level trapping of Interrupt 13, as by resident boot sector and
- MBR viruses, can also affect Windows operation, particularly if
- protected disk access (32BitDiskAccess=ON in SYSTEM.INI) is used.
-
-
- =========================================
- = Section F. Miscellaneous Questions =
- =========================================
-
- F1) How many viruses are there?
-
- It is not possible to give an exact number because new viruses are
- being created literally every day. Furthermore, different anti-virus
- researchers use different criteria to decide whether two viruses are
- different or one and the same. Some count viruses as different if
- they differ by at least one bit in their non-variable code. Others
- group the viruses in families and do not count the closely related
- variants in one family as different viruses.
-
- Taking a rough average, as of October 1992 there were about 1,800 IBM
- PC viruses, about 150 Amiga viruses, about 30 Macintosh viruses, about
- a dozen Acorn Archimedes viruses, several Atari ST viruses, and a few
- Apple II viruses.
-
- However, very few of the existing viruses are widespread. For
- instance, only about three dozen of the known IBM PC viruses are
- causing most of the reported infections.
-
-
- F2) How do viruses spread so quickly?
-
- This is a very complex issue. Most viruses don't spread very quickly.
- Those that do spread widely are able to do so for a variety of
- reasons. A large target population (i.e., millions of compatible
- computers) helps... A large virus population helps... Vendors whose
- quality assurance mechanisms rely on, for example, outdated scanners
- help... Users who gratuitously insert new software into their systems
- without making any attempt to test for viruses help... All of these
- things are factors.
-
-
- F3) What is the plural of "virus"? "Viruses" or "viri" or "virii" or...
-
- The correct English plural of "virus" is "viruses." The Latin word is
- a mass noun (like "air"), and there is no correct Latin plural.
- Please use "viruses," and if people use other forms, please don't use
- VIRUS-L/comp.virus to correct them.
-
-
- F4) When reporting a virus infection (and looking for assistance), what
- information should be included?
-
- People frequently post messages to VIRUS-L/comp.virus requesting
- assistance on a suspected virus problem. Quite often, the information
- supplied is not sufficient for the various experts on the list to be
- able to help out. Also note that any such assistance from members of
- the list is provided on a volunteer basis; be grateful for any help
- received. Try to provide the following information in your requests
- for assistance:
- - The name of the virus (if known);
- - The name of the program that detected it;
- - The version of the program that detected it;
- - Any other anti-virus software that you are running and
- whether it has been able to detect the virus or not, and if yes, by
- what name did it call it;
- - Your software and hardware configuration (computer type,
- kinds of disk(ette) drives, amount of memory and configuration
- (extended/expanded/conventional), TSR programs and device drivers
- used, OS version, etc.)
-
- It is helpful if you can use more than one scanning program to
- identify a virus, and to say which scanner gave which identification.
- However, some scanning programs leave "signatures" in memory which
- will confuse others, so it is best to do a "cold reboot" between runs
- of successive scanners, particularly if you are getting confusing
- results.
-
-
- F5) How often should we upgrade our anti-virus tools to minimize
- software and labor costs and maximize our protection?
-
- This is a difficult question to answer. Antiviral software is a kind
- of insurance, and these type of calculations are difficult.
-
- There are two things to watch out for here: the general "style" of the
- software, and the signatures which scanners use to identify viruses.
- Scanners should be updated more frequently than other software, and it
- is probably a good idea to update your set of signatures at least once
- every two months.
-
- Some antiviral software looks for changes to programs or specific
- types of viral "activity," and these programs generally claim to be
- good for "all current and future viral programs." However, even these
- programs cannot guarantee to protect against all future viruses, and
- should probably be upgraded once per year.
-
- Of course, not every anti-virus product is effective against all
- viruses, even if upgraded regularly. Thus, do *not* depend on the
- fact that you have upgraded your product recently as a guarantee that
- your system is free of viruses!
-
-
- =====================================================================
- = Section G. Specific Virus and Anti-viral software Questions... =
- =====================================================================
-
-
- G1) I was infected by the Jerusalem virus and disinfected the infected
- files with my favorite anti-virus program. However, Wordperfect
- and some other programs still refuse to work. Why?
-
- The Jerusalem virus and WordPerfect 4.2 program combination is an
- example of a virus and program that cannot be completely disinfected
- by an anti-virus tool. In some cases such as this one, the virus will
- destroy code by overwriting it instead of appending itself to the
- file. The only solution is to re-install the programs from clean
- (non-infected) backups or distribution media. (See question D10.)
-
-
- G2) I was told that the Stoned virus displays the text "Your PC is now
- Stoned" at boot time. I have been infected by this virus several
- times, but have never seen the message. Why?
-
- The "original" Stoned message was ".Your PC is now Stoned!", where the
- "." represents the "bell" character (ASCII 7 or "PC speaker beep").
- The message is displayed with a probability of 1 in 8 only when a PC is
- booted from an infected diskette. When booting from an infected hard
- disk, Stoned never displays this message.
-
- Recently, versions of Stoned with no message whatsoever or only the
- leading bell character have become very common. These versions of
- Stoned are likely to go unnoticed by all but the most observant, even
- when regularly booting from infected diskettes.
-
- Contrary to some reports, the Stoned virus -does NOT- display the
- message "LEGALISE MARIJUANA", although such a string is quite clearly
- visible in the boot sectors of diskettes infected with the "original"
- version of Stoned in "standard" PC's.
-
-
- G3) I was infected by both Stoned and Michelangelo. Why has my
- computer became unbootable? And why, each time I run my favorite
- scanner, does it find one of the viruses and say that it is
- removed, but when I run it again, it says that the virus is still
- there?
-
- These two viruses store the original Master Boot Record at one and the
- same place on the hard disk. They do not recognize each other, and
- therefore a computer can become infected with both of them at the same
- time.
-
- The first of these viruses that infects the computer will overwrite
- the Master Boot Record with its body and store the original MBR at a
- certain place on the disk. So far, this is normal for a boot-record
- virus. But if now the other virus infects the computer too, it will
- replace the MBR (which now contains the virus that has come first)
- with its own body, and store what it believes is the original MBR (but
- in fact is the body of the first virus) AT THE SAME PLACE on the hard
- disk, thus OVERWRITING the original MBR. When this happens, the
- contents of the original MBR are lost. Therefore the disk becomes
- non-bootable.
-
- When a virus removal program inspects such a hard disk, it will see
- the SECOND virus in the MBR and will try to remove it by overwriting
- it with the contents of the sector where this virus normally stores
- the original MBR. However, now this sector contains the body of the
- FIRST virus. Therefore, the virus removal program will install the
- first virus in trying to remove the second. In all probability it
- will not wipe out the sector where the (infected) MBR has been stored.
-
- When the program is run again, it will find the FIRST virus in the
- MBR. By trying to remove it, the program will get the contents of the
- sector where this virus normally stores the original MBR, and will
- move it over the current (infected) MBR. Unfortunately, this sector
- still contains the body of the FIRST virus. Therefore, the body of
- this virus will be re-installed over the MBR ad infinitum.
-
- There is no easy solution to this problem, since the contents of the
- original MBR is lost. The only solution for the anti-virus program is
- to detect that there is a problem, and to overwrite the contents of
- the MBR with a valid MBR program, which the anti-virus program will
- have to carry with itself. If your favorite anti-virus program is not
- that smart, consider replacing it with a better one, or just boot from
- a write-protected uninfected DOS 5.0 diskette, and execute the program
- FDISK with the option /MBR. This will re-create the executable code
- in the MBR without modifying the partition table data.
-
- In general, infection by multiple viruses of the same file or area is
- possible and vital areas of the original may be lost. This can make
- it difficult or impossible for virus disinfection tools to be
- effective, and replacement of the lost file/area will be necessary.
-
- ====================
- [End of VIRUS-L/comp.virus FAQ]
-
- Xref: bloom-picayune.mit.edu comp.os.mach:2528 news.answers:3092
- Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!mintaka.lcs.mit.edu!olivea!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!po1!boone
- From: boone@psc.edu (Jon Boone)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.mach,news.answers
- Subject: comp.os.mach.FAQ
- Message-ID: <1992Sep22.014554.18002@psc.edu>
- Date: 22 Sep 92 01:45:54 GMT
- Expires: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 00:00:00 GMT
- Reply-To: iain+@cmu.edu
- Followup-To: comp.os.mach
- Organization: Pittsburgh SuperComputing Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Lines: 277
- Approved: news-answers-request@MIT.EDU
- Supersedes: <1992Sep9.030023.12840@psc.edu>
-
-
- Archive-name: comp-os-mach-faq
-
- ----- COMP.OS.MACH FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ) +++++
- +++++ maintained by Jon "Iain" Boone -----
- ----- send any additions and/or correctionst to +++++
- +++++ iain+@andrew.cmu.edu -----
-
- Sometimes a question you have is asked so often that many people who
- have been following a group for a while know the answer and asking the
- question might generate an unusually large number of replies. In
- order to save net.bandwidth as well as to provide a usefull source of
- answers for some of the more basic questions, the following list of
- Frequently Asked Questions is presented.
-
- 1) Where can I get a release of Mach for my machine?
- 2) What 386/486 boards does Mach 3.0 run on?
- 3) How easy is it to install MACH?
- 4) What about NeXT OS?
- 5) What about OSF/1?
- 6) What about the GNU HURD?
- 7) What are some books I can read to find out about MACH?
- 8) When will the 4.4 BSD Unix single server be ready?
-
- ANSWERS:
-
- 1) Where can I get a release of Mach for my machine?
-
- MACH 3.0:
-
- This is only the micro-kernel - no filesystem, no ttys, no
- nothing. To get the rest, you need to have some type of source
- license for BSD -> which implies a source license from AT&T .
-
- The sources for the Mach 3.0 distribution can be obtained via
- uucp, ftp, sup and afs. In order to recieve them via uucp, the
- normal uunet mechanism for retrieving source or call 1-900-GOT-SRCS
- (login ``uucp'' - no passwd) and retrieve files with the uucp
- command - the cost is $0.40(US) per minute on your phone bill. For
- questions about the uunet service, send them to info@uunet.uu.net.
-
- The preferred method of distribution is via a program called SUP.
- If you use SUP, you can retrieve files which require a AT&T
- license, which you can not get through either uucp, ftp or afs. To
- find out more about SUP, send mail to mach@cs.cmu.edu.
-
- You can get the sources and other interesting info over afs from
- the directory /afs/cs.cmu.edu/project/mach/public/src.
-
- The same sources can be obtained via anonymous ftp from the
- following places:
-
- US:
-
- username:anonymous
- passwd: <name>@<site>
-
- cmu: mach.cs.cmu.edu (128.2.209.192) in /usr/mach/public/src
- uunet: ftp.uu.net (137.39.1.2) in packages/mach
-
- JAPAN:
-
- username:ftp
- passwd: YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS
-
- sh.wide.ad.jp (133.4.11.11) in MACH
- ftp.dit.co.jp (133.156.1.1) in pub/MACH
- ftp.mei.co.jp (132.182.49.2) in mach
- ftp.cs.titech.ac.jp (131.112.16.39)
-
- FINLAND:
-
- username:anonymous
- passwd:<name>@<site>
-
- nic.funet.fi (128.214.6.100) in pub/mach/Mach3.0
-
-
- Mary Thompson <mrt+@CS.CMU.EDU> writes:
-
- Both docmuments and sources for Mach are now available from the
- same machine and subdirectory. To find out what is available use
- the following instructions:
-
- Ftp to mach.cs.cmu.edu (128.2.209.192), as "anonymous", at the
- password prompt send your Username@site (you must include the "@"
- or the login will fail). Then "cd /usr/mach/public". You can then
- use the standard ftp commands, e.g. get, ls with relative path
- names for the files.
-
- The FAQ directory contains answers to frequently asked questions.
- The doc dirctory (and its subdirectories) contain technical reports
- and some papers. The src directory contains the part of the Mach
- 3.0 kernel sources that are available without licenses The sup
- directory has sources and docmumentation for our Software Update
- Protocol program. The conferences directory has annoucements of
- up-coming conferences or courses pertaining to Mach.
-
-
- MACH 2.5:
-
- A Mach 2.5 distribution is available for the IBM RT, PC-AT
- clones, Vaxen and Sun3's from Mt. Xinu. This is a complete
- source distribution including a BSD 4.3-tahoe utility set.
- This requires an AT&T source license.
-
- Mt. Xinu also has a product known as Mach386, which runs on
- PC-AT clones (386, 486 or 386SX cpu). It is a binary-only
- distribution which contains ``Mach 2.5 kernel and
- utilities'', ``4.3 BSD interface'', ``GNU utilities (GCC,
- GDB, GAS, EMACS,BISON)'' and ``on-line reference manuals
- (man pages) for Mach and 4.3 BSD.'' Optional modules for
- Networking, X and On-line Documentation (source) are
- available. Mt. Xinu claims that it runs on ``most of the
- common AT-bus IBM PCs and compatibles such as Compaq,
- Intel, Olivetti, Toshiba and Hewlett-Packard.'' The X11 is
- a complete R4, including 8-bit color and support for many
- extended VGA cards, basedon the work by Roell.
-
- For further information, contact mtxinu-mach@mtxinu.com
- (email) or 1+(510)-644-0146.
-
- Tenon Intersystems has a product known as MachTen. MachTen is
- an implementation of Berkeley's 4.3BSD Unix, built on a Carnegie
- Mellon Mach 2.5 foundation. MachTen runs as an application on
- the native Macintosh Operating System (MacOS). Included with
- MachTen are Unix programs and a Mach kernel. The kernel
- supports a standard Unix applications environment which includes
- over 300 standard Unix applications. That environment also
- allows all standard Macintosh programs, such as a Macintosh
- spreadsheet or desk accessory application, to run simultaneously
- with Unix programs. MachTen extends MacOS with true Unix
- multitasking, full internet communications, a distributed file
- system via NFS, and a Unix software development environment.
- MachTen does not currently support Macintosh System 7, but
- support for System 7 will be available early in 1992 as a free
- upgrade. MachTen runs on all modern Macintoshes, MacPlus
- through Mac IIfx.
-
- For further information, contact info@tenon.com (email) or
- 1+(800) 662-2410.
-
-
- 2) What 386/486 boards does Mach 3.0 run on?
-
- George Scott <scottg@SCL.CWRU.EDU> writes:
-
- Gateway 486/33 (works great with factory hardware)
- Micronics motherboard
-
- AT&T 6386WGS (factory ESDI hard drive controller does not work!)
- Olivetti/AT&T proprietary
-
-
- 3) How easy is it to install MACH?
-
- 4) What about NeXT OS?
-
- Avie Tevanian of NeXT writes:
-
- NeXT started with the Mach 2.0 sources and have picked up most of the
- Mach 2.5 and beyond kernel fixes, except for external pagers. The NeXT
- environment includes all of Unix and goes well beyond supporting
- object oriented programs and lots of fancy graphics.
-
- It is possible to get the machine-independent kernel sources as well
- as all the library and environment sources from NeXT. Only the
- machine-dependent sources such as device drivers are unavailable.
-
- From Carrick Talmadge
- clt@physics.purdue.edu
-
- The latest NeXT price lists reportedly shows:
-
- N5515 NeXT 2.0 Mach Source Release on Floppies $10,000
- [$5000 for educational institutions].
-
- I am led to understand that this includes the various licensing fees.
-
- 5) What about OSF/1?
-
- The Open Software Foundation releases a version of Mach that starts
- from the Mach 2.5 kernel sources. They incorporated the University of
- Guelph's NFS implementation and have expanded the user environment
- from straight BSD4.3 to include some System V features and Motif.
-
- From: Nick dokos <nick@osf.org>
-
- Grace Perez has left OSF, so sending mail to grace@osf.org won't work.
-
- For more information on pricing, availability etc. of OSF/1, contact
- OSF Direct Channels, direct@osf.org, +1 617 621 7300.
-
- From: Joseph Boykin <boykin@encore.com>
-
- OSF distributes and supports two source platforms:
- The Encore Multimax and DecStation 3100.
-
- They also distribute a number of "contributed ports". That is,
- companies which have done ports of OSF/1 to various architectures and
- are willing to ship it, but which OSF does not support. The OSF/1
- tape includes support for:
-
- HP/Apollo's 68030 (Dn2500)
- i860
- Clipper (Series 6000 workstation w/C300 processor)
-
- OSF will ship a 386 version, but they're still working on it.
-
- 6) What about the GNU HURD?
-
- From Michael I Bushnell <mib@gnu.ai.mit.edu>:
-
- The GNU Hurd (`Hurd' is an acronym, but its meaning is not public
- yet) [Hurd has subsequently been defined as a set of mutually recursive
- acronyms: Hurd stands for "Hird of Unix-Replacing Daemons" and Hird
- stands for Hurd of Interfaces Representing Depth" - iain ] is a set of
- servers which, in combination with the GNU C Library, will provide Posix
- and BSD functionality on top of the Mach 3.0 microkernel. The initial
- target is the i386, with the pmax probably following shortly thereafter.
- The Hurd is still in development, but those interested in discussing
- various aspects of it are welcome to join the hurd-folks mailing list.
- To join the list or find out how to get the current sources, send mail
- to hurd-folks-request@gnu.ai.mit.edu.
-
- Right now there is not a lot of work that can be done by people
- outside the FSF, but those who are interested in having the Hurd
- ultimately run on their machine would help a lot by writing free
- ports of the 3.0 microkernel. Contact mach@cs.cmu.edu for
- information on doing this; CMU coordinates these efforts.
-
- -mib
-
-
- 7) What are some books I can read to find out about MACH?
-
- Information about Mach can be found in the following books:
- --------------------------------------------------------
-
- Operating Systems Concepts
- A. Silberschatz, J.L Peterson, P.B. Galvin
- Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 3rd Edition 1991
-
- Chapter 16, pages 597-628 is about Mach.
- --------------------------------------------------------
-
- Distributed Operating Systems: The Logical Design
- A. Goscinski
- Addison-Wesley Publishers., 1991
-
- Chapter 14.8, pages 864-888 is about Mach
- -------------------------------------------------------
-
- Not out yet, but promised
-
- The Design of the Mach Operating system
- N. Bitar, A. Langermann and E. Sheinbrood
- to be published by Prentice-Hall.
-
- --------------------------------------------------------
-
- 8) When will the 4.4 BSD Unix single server be ready?
-
- CMU is working on a 4.4 BSD Unix single server to run under MACH
- 3.0. Currently, it is scheduled for release in the late spring.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- /*****************************************************************************/
- /* Jon Boone Network Systems Administrator Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center */
- /* boone@psc.edu iain+@cmu.edu I'm a member of the LPF, how 'bout you? */
- /* I don't speak for anyone other than myself, unless otherwise stated. */
- /*****************************************************************************/
- Xref: bloom-picayune.mit.edu rec.crafts.textiles:2934 alt.sewing:5643 rec.org.sca:32687 news.answers:4581
- Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!enterpoop.mit.edu!think.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!ogicse!news.u.washington.edu!uw-beaver!cornell!alg
- From: alg@cs.cornell.edu (Anne Louise Gockel)
- Newsgroups: rec.crafts.textiles,alt.sewing,rec.org.sca,news.answers
- Subject: Historical Costuming FAQ
- Summary: Lists of sources for patterns and supplies for historical costuming.
- Bibliography of relevant books. Info relevant to SCA periods (600 AD
- to 1600 AD) and Civil War. Some pointers to Historical Reenactment
- groups.
- Keywords: FAQ, historical costuming, sewing, textiles, books, patterns, sources
- Message-ID: <1992Dec14.124545.14149@cs.cornell.edu>
- Date: 14 Dec 92 12:45:45 GMT
- Article-I.D.: cs.1992Dec14.124545.14149
- Expires: Sun, 14 Feb 1993 05:00:00 GMT
- Sender: alg@cs.cornell.edu (Anne Louise Gockel)
- Reply-To: alg@cs.cornell.edu
- Followup-To: rec.crafts.textiles
- Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
- Lines: 791
- Approved: news-answers-request@MIT.Edu
- Supersedes: <1992Oct14.161740.4245@cs.cornell.edu>
-