| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 55730 | 2005-03-18 07:48:00 | 64 bit vs. 32 bit pc | Renmoo (66) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 335368 | 2005-03-18 20:04:00 | I cannot say that i have seen a virus that has been compiled for only 64-bit. That would be silly. But then I dont use windows or amd64 do I... |
ILikeLinux (1669) | ||
| 335369 | 2005-03-20 05:01:00 | Viruses arent 32 or 64 bit. They infect anything. Any version of Windows, and other operating systems. So, really it doesnt matter what u use. If the operating system can get viruses now it'll get them later. It has nothing to do with whether u have a 32 or 64 bit system. Viruses arent based on 32 or 64 bit anything. I am a bit confused over your statement. If a program meant for 32 bit, can it run on 64 bit? If a virus meant for 32 bit, can a virus be execute on 64 bit machine? Is it common that a virus writer write virus that are meant for both 32 bit and 64 bit machines? Cheers and thanks everyone for their comments :) |
Renmoo (66) | ||
| 335370 | 2005-03-20 05:15:00 | I am a bit confused over your statement. If a program meant for 32 bit, can it run on 64 bit? If a virus meant for 32 bit, can a virus be execute on 64 bit machine? Is it common that a virus writer write virus that are meant for both 32 bit and 64 bit machines? Cheers and thanks everyone for their comments :) Viruses as already said will work/run on anything. If u use a version of Windows, that a virus can infect, you'll get whatever virus is around at the time. Whether its 16, 32, or 64 bit. Viruses arent choosy what they infect! Neither are the people who write them. |
Speedy Gonzales (78) | ||
| 335371 | 2005-03-20 05:42:00 | Viruses arent 32 or 64 bit. They infect anything. Any version of Windows, and other operating systems. So, really it doesnt matter what u use. If the operating system can get viruses now it'll get them later. It has nothing to do with whether u have a 32 or 64 bit system. Viruses arent based on 32 or 64 bit anything. Having problems with that statement. Viruses are compiled into code that Windows will run. If not, then that are not viruses, just meaningless data. If they are compiled (whether by ASM, C++, or any of the other programming systems) then they must be either 16 or 32 (or 64) bit code. Or they are a data payload that is interpreted by 16 or 32 or 64 bit code. Same difference. So if the virus is executed by 32 bit code as an example, and the 64 bit processor handles 32 bit code (which it will or nothing would run much at present), then there is no difference. The virus could run. And that will be the status quo for a while yet. |
godfather (25) | ||
| 335372 | 2005-03-20 06:04:00 | lol well whatever. As i was saying if your version of windows can get whatever virus it will get it, whether you like it or not. End of story |
Speedy Gonzales (78) | ||
| 335373 | 2005-03-20 07:57:00 | This is what I sum up: 1. 32 bit programs can run on 64 bit machines because 64 bit are backward-compatible. 2. 64 bit programs cannot run on 32 bit machines. 3. Therefore, virus created by 32 bit can run on 64 bit but not vice versa 4. Which makes 64 bit computers more "dangerous" because it can be infected by both 32 bit and 64 bit viruses. (Although I agree vehemently that 64 bit viruses are not common YET) 5. But 64 bit machines has a security feature named NX. 6. So, am I right so far? |
Renmoo (66) | ||
| 335374 | 2005-03-20 08:10:00 | Yes, I believe so. Perhaps add that older 16 bit viruses may perhaps not work in a 64 bit environment (but not sure if any of the oldies are prevalent?) |
godfather (25) | ||
| 335375 | 2005-03-20 09:18:00 | As I said earlier, 16 bit programs will not run on 64 bit computers. This includes viri | Edward (31) | ||
| 335376 | 2005-03-20 09:40:00 | So far so good, yes, but this may be worth reading: www.washingtonpost.com http://www.x86-64.org/ www.thejemreport.com |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 335377 | 2005-03-20 10:12:00 | Simple fix. Don't get a virus in the first place. It's quite easy to avoid them usually. | Jeremy (1197) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||