MacSilverWare/macsilverware.iso/Utilities/Gatekeeper 1.2.9 Distribution/Gatekeeper FAQ.txt

Text File | 1993-11-11 | 12KB | 289 lines

Gatekeeper Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) List

11-Nov-93

Chris Johnson




Q: I'm upgrading to a new version of Gatekeeper, and I've tried to throw
   away my old Gatekeeper Prefs file so that Gatekeeper will create a new
   one with all latest privileges in it. Unfortunately, it's not working;
   the Finder says it can't empty the Trash because the Prefs file is in
   use. What's going wrong?

A: Nothing, really. The Gatekeeper Prefs file is still being used by the
   old version of Gatekeeper currently operating inside your Mac. This
   needn't be a problem, however.

   If you're using System 7 (or better), just the put that old prefs file
   in the Trash and leave it there. Don't bother trying to empty the Trash.
   Now proceed with the installation of the new Gatekeeper and restart the
   Mac when you're finished. Once the Mac has been restarted you'll have
   no trouble emptying the Trash.

   If you're using System 6 (or earlier), just drag the old prefs file out
   of the System Folder. It doesn't matter where you put it, so long as
   you can find it again later. Now proceed with the installation of the
   new Gatekeeper and restart the Mac when you're finished. Once the Mac
   has been restarted, place the old Prefs file in the Trash; you'll have
   no trouble emptying it now.



Q: Does friendly email qualify as sending a postcard? I'm too cheap for
   the stamp.

A: No. It's really not the same.... I want those postcards; it's a small
   thing to ask, and it does leave me *something* to show for all the
   work.



Q: Is there a Gatekeeper mailing list?

A: There wasn't until the release of Gatekeeper 1.2.9, but now there is
   one. For more information, see the document "Gatekeeper Mailing List.txt"
   which was included in the complete Gatekeeper distribution.



Q: Why does Gatekeeper have an expiration date?

A: The expiration date and associated obsolecence warning exists to
   make sure that people don't depend on out-of-date anti-virus soft-
   ware for any significant length of time.

   The presense of out-of-date anti-virus software in the world only
   helps viruses and their authors; it hurts people who believe they're
   protected when they aren't, prevents them from benefitting from bug
   fixes or other improvements that've been incorporated in later vers-
   ions, and hurts the reputation of the product when people discover
   that their old version isn't protecting them from some virus, or is
   malfunctioning in some way that has since been dealt with.

   Since Gatekeeper and other suspicious activity monitor products
   (like SAM and Virex in some modes) work as a kind of early warning
   system for the entire Macintosh community, it's a bad thing if
   there's a lot of old, less robust versions still in use since they
   potentially form holes in that system.



Q: How can I find out what Gatekeeper's expiration date is?

A: There's no facility for doing so. You could set your Mac's clock
   ahead by a year or two, reboot your machine and see what Gatekeeper
   says, but that's about it.

   FYI, the shortest expiration time on a Gatekeeper release has been
   6 months. For Gatekeeper 1.2.7, which has already expired, it was 7.
   For 1.2.8 and 1.2.9 it's 12 months from the date of their respective
   releases.



Q: Does Gatekeeper stop working when it expires?

A: No. Even after its expiration date, Gatekeeper continues to be fully
   functional. The expiration message is only for your information.



Q: Is Gatekeeper incompatible with MacTCP? I just installed a fresh
   copy of MacTCP and Gatekeeper vetoed an operation on the MacTCP Prep
   file when I restarted the machine.

A: No, Gatekeeper has no conflict with MacTCP. The only way this problem
   can occur is if you're using a modern version of Gatekeeper in
   conjunction with a very old Gatekeeper Prefs file. To solve the
   problem, get rid of the old Gatekeeper Prefs file (see the question
   on trashing the Prefs file elsewhere in this FAQ). Also get rid of
   the MacTCP Prep file which was the victim of this conflict (don't
   worry; MacTCP will create a new MacTCP Prep file the next time you
   restart your Mac). Once you've eliminated both files, restart your
   Mac and everything should work perfectly.



Q: Some program whose name begins with a period (.) is performing
   operations which Gatekeeper keeps vetoing. I searched my hard disk for
   a file with that name, but couldn't find one. What gives?

A: Names beginning with a period, like ".ipp", are names of *drivers*,
   rather than files. Since drivers typically live *inside* files (like
   the System file), you won't find a file on your disk with its name.
   Nonetheless, drivers can be granted privileges, so the problem of those
   vetoes can be solved. It'll be easiest to grant those privileges from
   the Log File display in the Gatekeeper Controls control panel. See the
   "Gatekeeper Introduction" document for details on how to grant
   privileges from the Log File display.



Q: Can Gatekeeper and Disinfectant be used together? If so, does that
   include the Disinfectant INIT, too?

A: Yes and yes. Sure, using both Gatekeeper *and* Disinfectant INIT
   is redundant in a number of respects, but if the products get along
   together (and they do) what's wrong with redundant protection?
   Personally, I recommend it.



Q: Will Gatekeeper work on the much anticipated Power PC machines?

A: It should. Gatekeeper 1.2.7 has been tested on a Power PC machine
   without incident. Unless Gatekeeper or the Power PC machines have
   changed adversely since that test was performed, there's every
   reason to believe they'll work together just fine.



Q: When a privilege violation occurs, I'd really like Gatekeeper to
   bring up an alert asking me whether or not the offending operation
   should be vetoed. Sort of a "Notify & Ask" mode, if you see what I
   mean. I can't be the only person to have suggested this; how come
   there's no such feature?

A: There's two reasons. The first is that I think such a mode is only
   useful and safe for the most sophisticated of users. In such a mode,
   the anti-virus protection you receive is only as good as the answers
   you provide to the anti-virus system's questions. If you happen to
   give bad answers, bad things happen. Gatekeeper was designed around
   that idea that people shouldn't have to know anything about viruses
   in order to be protected from them; the anti-virus system should
   have a built-in database that already knows the answers. That's what
   Gatekeeper's privilege list is all about. Sure, it's not perfect,
   but it works really well even so.

   Nonetheless, I readily concede that a Notify & Ask mode would have
   its uses, and I'd have implemented it (and more) by now if it weren't
   for two things: (a) Gatekeeper often operates at times when software
   is not allowed to do *anything* that might cause memory to be moved
   or purged, and (b) even the simplest of QuickDraw calls (like LineTo)
   reserves the right to move or purge memory. So if Gatekeeper were
   to attempt to draw even the most rudimentary of alerts at the wrong
   time a very ugly crash would occur.

   Obviously, SAM knows how to bring up alerts safely at apparently
   arbitrary times. Less obviously, the Mac OS does, too. Unfortun-
   ately, I don't think the nice folks at Symantec are gonna tell me
   how they did it, :-) and the folks at Apple just don't seem to know
   how the Mac OS pulls it off anymore. (OK, *someone* at Apple *must*
   know....)

   Anyway, I have my own ideas about safe ways to bring up alerts, etc.
   at arbitrary times, but there's still a terrific amount of code to
   be written, so everyone will have to continue to be patient (unless
   someone out there knows the real trick to this).



Q: I keep seeing messages from Gatekeeper saying that "System" is
   violating the Res(Other) privilege while making a "RsrcMapEntry"
   call. What gives?

A: You're probably using either AutoDoubler, or some product which uses
   its internal compressor. See the question regarding Nisus elsewhere
   in this FAQ for details. If you're *sure* AutoDoubler isn't involved
   in any way, send me a problem report.



Q: Whenever I run Nisus I see messages from Gatekeeper saying that the
   program "System" is violating the Res(Other) privilege while making a
   call apparently called "RsrcMapEntry". What's going on here?

A: Recent versions of Nisus appear to use the AutoDoubler Internal
   Compressor (AIC). As such, there's not much I can do to offer a good
   solution to the problem. One less-than-wonderful solution is to grant
   the Res(Other) privilege to the System. While this will eliminate the
   annoying alerts from Gatekeeper, it will also open-up a security hole
   which just might be a problem someday.

   Of course, I could discontinue protection of the RsrcMapEntry call
   altogether (it's already been watered-down over time for reasons like
   this), but that would open-up an even bigger security hole.

   The Macintosh developer community needs to come to grips with the
   fact that an anything-goes, I-should-be-able-to-do-whatever-I-want
   approach to software design precludes useful attempts to provide
   security to the platform. And without some form of security, the
   viruses run amok, and we all lose out.



Q: Does Gatekeeper work with AutoDoubler?

A: This question is backwards, for two reasons. (1) Gatekeeper predates
   AutoDoubler (a minor point, but worth remembering), and (2) Gatekeeper
   provides a truly *fundamental* service to the Macintosh community as a
   *whole*; AutoDoubler which provides neither a fundamental service, nor
   a service which benefits the whole Macintosh community, isn't even in
   the same league as Gatekeeper. The question should really be: "Does
   AutoDoubler work with Gatekeeper?"



Q: Does AutoDoubler work with Gatekeeper?

A: No. Not consistently. This goes for software which relies on the
   AutoDoubler Internal Compressor (AIC) as well. If you choose to use
   Gatekeeper and any 'Doubler product together - and some people do so
   with surprising success - I don't want to hear about any problems.



Q: Does AutoDoubler work with other anti-virus products of the suspicious-
   activity-monitor variety?

A: Yes. Originally, AutoDoubler conflicted with some (possibly all) of
   them, but the anti-virus products were modified to work around Auto-
   Doubler. Unfortunately, all those anti-virus products are commercial,
   so if you're considering buying AutoDoubler, be sure to factor in the
   cost of buying a new anti-virus system to go along with it.



Q: Do any of the on-the-fly disk/file compression utilities work with
   Gatekeeper?

A: Some appear to, including the StuffIt SpaceSaver product. Personally,
   though, I don't recommend using *any* on-the-fly compression product,
   no matter how competent and conscientious its developer may be. The
   best solution for a small hard disk is a big one, not a complex piece
   of software standing between you and your data, consuming CPU cycles,
   and adding even more failure modes to machines far too prone to
   failure in the first place.



Q: I called the AutoDoubler folks to ask about the conflict with Gate-
   keeper. They said they're in touch with the publishers of Gatekeeper,
   that it's Gatekeeper's fault, and that the Gatekeeper developers are
   working to fix the problem. Is this true?

A: No, not a word of it. I'm the "publisher". I'm the developer. I'm the
   whole show. If I'd heard from the AutoDoubler folks in the last year
   (or two) I'm sure I'd know about it. If I'd come to the conclusion
   that it was all my fault, I expect I'd be aware of that, too. If I
   was working to fix the problem, I'm sure I'd have noticed that....



Q: Why does half this FAQ seem to be concerned with AutoDoubler?

A: Because it seems like half the Gatekeeper email I get is concerned
   with AutoDoubler, and I don't ever want to see a message mentioning
   it again. I know, I know... fat chance of that happening, but I can
   hope....  :-)