Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: John Ames Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2025 08:39:00 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 36 Message-ID: <20251203083900.00002c04@gmail.com> References: <1864d8e7ae136b94$115$2498948$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com> <10a4ph3$obcm$2@dont-email.me> <68c5ef9f@news.ausics.net> <10a5sou$1360o$7@dont-email.me> <10fcb5j$3enl$1@dont-email.me> <20251120145948.00000987@gmail.com> <20251124092600.00001815@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2025 16:39:04 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="181b9b390e9c76ae9cef8b407ebe0604"; logging-data="3654055"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+lB0qSWQL5XIH8Hnzh+0iEpUzj/RhNiK4=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:oPjG+sKENd4zYZYVvE3dp/67RNw= X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 4.3.0 (GTK 3.24.42; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.advocacy:702220 comp.os.linux.misc:78241 On Tue, 2 Dec 2025 20:13:15 -0000 (UTC) Gremlin wrote: > > Interesting - I'm curious how common that actually was back in the > > day, though? I don't recall a lot of DOS applications that I used > > chaining from one EXE to another, unless you were really into > > launcher-menu type utilities; most of what I remember was single > > EXEs for the main program plus accessory EXEs for configuration > > (i.e. the inevitable SOUNDSET.EXE and its ilk,) and transfer of > > control was usually mediated by a *.BAT launcher script. > > It was common enough to be known amongst every coder I knew. Some > programmers too. Take some of the multi floppy install packages for > example. Some decrypted the necessary materials as they built the > primary file on your computer. The primary file wouldn't always have > a proper executable extension, but, it was still actually an .EXE > most of the time. Huh, I'm trying to model what an exploit would look like here - who & what would be vulnerable to this? Obviously you *can* create a disk file with a non-EXE extension & whatever contents you want, but under what circumstances is another program gonna call the load-and-execute routine on any arbitrary filename (other than, as mentioned, app-menu utilities or command-shell alternatives?) Or if the game is to replace one of an application suite's own I-can't-believe-it's-not-EXEs with a Trojan, which developers bothered to mask their secondary EXEs under a different extension, and why...? (I mean, yes, installers might well build a final EXE from smaller and/or compressed/encrypted chunks, but the *resulting* file would normally still have an EXE extension, and be invoked the usual way.) Not saying that it doesn't make sense to check files on a better-safe- than-sorry heuristic, just trying to figure out how you'd get to the point of pulling that kind of trick in the first place...