Consider this before Downloading Files or using Information from the Internet

I believe that you should consider two separate issues before using a program (or accepting information) from the Internet:

  1. Can you trust the author of the information or the program ?

  2. How reliable is the security vs. the chances of a person taking the time to hack into the download page, or just outright lie and fraudulently claim to be someone else ? (I.e., " Did it really come from 'the author'?" )

 Regarding the first issue, note that I said the author (programmer) must be trusted, and not just the site that is distributing the program. It is possible that a new virus/trojan could be placed on a major download site if people are not careful in "checking out" its author. Sites vary a lot, and even if they say otherwise, may leave all the checking up to you!

I try to use programs that come from both a reputable site and whose author I've been able to contact (or at least read about). The more references to a program on major sites and information about its author, the better the chances are that it is a legitimate and useful program. If the program is open source (check out all the projects at
http://sourceforge.net/) and has many people working on it and many downloads, chances are it's quite safe. On the other hand, if a cracker can break into such a place, that would be a 'juicy prize' indeed.
(Caution: Knowledge of widespread programs by reputable authors, such as WinZip ®, may be used by virus writers to infect your computer after they infect a copy of the program or hide a trojan in it: Just because a program has the same name as a famous one, that certainly doesn't make it the same thing! This is why some programmers have added 'self-authenticating' code routines to their software and/or list MD5 sums of their files. But before you can trust either of these, you may need independent confirmation that the MD5 sums are trustworthy, or that a program really should have 'self-authenticating' routines in the first place! Thus, the next step for those who are very security conscious is the use of PGP-signature files; see below.)

 The second issue may depend upon an ISP's ability to keep crackers from breaking into their servers and  whether or not there is much chance of someone wanting to do so. Websites which are very critical of crackers, or seemingly boast about how invulnerable they are, would be the kind they normally go after: the CIA, FBI, an Internet security company, or some large media organization.

On the other hand, if someone really wanted to distribute a virus/trojan far and wide, they would probably choose a website with little security...
There have already been a number of documented cases! For example:
On a large website, a program that claimed to remove the Back Orifice trojan was made available for download. It appeared to search for BO when run. However, those in charge of the website had to be informed by a third party (who goes by the handle, "pchelp") that this program was in fact just another form of the Back Orifice trojan itself! Someone had disguised it as a working anti-BO program, and many unsuspecting people installed it on their computers.
(The details may be found at pchelp's website here:
http://www.nwi.net/~pchelp/bo/nosniff.htm.) This BO-trojan trojan  was called, BO Sniffer, but it could easily be lurking out there under a different name. So, beware! (And again, just because a program has the same NAME as a well respected tool, that doesn't make it the same program either!) A more recent (November 2002) example of a well-known website that was broken into and had a trojan attached to some of its download files can be seen here: Trojan Horse in tcpdump and libpcap Distributions, or read the CNET news article about it here: Hackers drop spyware into popular tool

Ref: n.d. Keeping Viruses Out of your Computer, viewed 30 August 2003, <http://www.geocities.com/thestarman3/avt/download.html>.