"William S. Pettit" <wpettit@ix.netcom.com> writes:
> Well, the way is was explained to me is: the image files require use of RAM to store values as they
> are uncompressed. Intel XXXX86 binary instruction set values can be stored in 2X2 up to 6X6 pixel
> values and specifically directed by embedded decoding to memory locations where the so-called virus
> is assembled. The decoding virus can be embedded in a web image as a seried of 1X1 GIFs. I suggest
> you check out BUGNOSIS--they have a web site that explains the GIF bug.
Yes, of course you can assemble a sequence of bits that if executed
would delete all the files on your hard disk. You can compute this
as a decimal number, for example. But unless *something else* malicious
causes this sequence of bits to be executed, nothing will happen.
An uncompressed bit image format (like .bmp) essentially contains the
picture data directly. Suppose the (decimal) byte sequence 57 38 36 119
215 196 were enough to do something nasty? This would (according to the
snake-oil peddlers) mean that no image could contain a rgb(57, 38, 36)
pixel with an rgb(119, 215, 196) pixel to the right of it.
It is perfectly true that you could I suppose design a virus that was
"triggered" by detecting a particular sequence of bytes in a file
somewhere, but then you could just as easily look for a particular byte
sequence in a text file. This is back to the world of magic charms, and
other nonsense. Of course the mumbo-jumbo artists of the world, with
their websites full of crystals emitting beams of light, would like you
to believe that words ("data") in and of themselves cause changes to the
physical world, but the evidence (both empirical and logical) is rather
strongly against it.
Brian Chandler
----------------
geo://Sano.Japan.Planet_3
http://imaginatorium.org/books/topten.htm
