home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.protocols.nfs:2749 comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc:6232
- Path: sparky!uunet!destroyer!gatech!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!slc6!trier
- From: trier@slc6.ins.cwru.edu (Stephen C. Trier)
- Newsgroups: comp.protocols.nfs,comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
- Subject: Re: Can you chmod 111 in a DOS NFS redirector?
- Date: 11 Nov 1992 21:00:57 GMT
- Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland OH (USA)
- Lines: 22
- Message-ID: <1drsa9INNpf7@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
- References: <1992Nov11.000531.576@alf.cooper.edu> <1992Nov11.144951.9604@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> <1992Nov11.170118.3527@ethome.et.iupui.edu>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: slc6.ins.cwru.edu
-
- In article <1992Nov11.170118.3527@ethome.et.iupui.edu> scott@ethome.et.iupui.edu writes:
- >I can't speak for PCNFS, but setting the setuid bit on the executable hides
- >the file when using BWNFS. This prevents msdos from seeing it when using
- >its resident commands like DIR and COPY.
-
- Try DIR /a on DOS 5, or try any reasonable file manager like XTree, PC-Tools,
- whatever.
-
- Hiding files is not a form of copy protection.
-
- There's no good way to do execute-only on DOS, though one can get it good
- enough to foil most attackers. There is no way I know of to do decent
- copy-protection in Windows. (According to _Undocumented Windows_, Windows
- converts all WinExec() calls into normal int 21H Open and Read calls, with
- no way (that I could see) for a network redirector to tell that the calls
- are for execution rather than copying.)
-
- --
- Stephen Trier
- Network Services Engineering, IRIS/INS/Telecom
- Case Western Reserve University
- trier@ins.cwru.edu
-