I would like to add my humble opinion in this topic, and I clear out it's just my opinion and that I am willing to accept and respect any rules in the forum, whether they match my opinion or not (*DISCLAIMER*)

I believe Neville is making a very clear and good point and I agree with him, but I also understand the perspective Revolution is stating. I think that Revolution is not wrong either, but I would change the reasons of this.

Malware is malware, regardless of what OS it's made for and one could be inspired in a virus to make another, so DOS is no exception to any rule, but the I think this is not a problem in FASM forum because anybody with the capability to read and understand a virus code can also develop their own easily, without a base code. In fact, it's much easier to start from scratch, since old viruses will not work on new systems, even viruses designed for the same OS. DOS is not the same now as it used to be because computers have changed.

I've been curious myself to read code from viruses that I remember from the good old times, such as Michelangelo, Stoned, Tequila, Predator, etc. I don't want to build a virus and cause havoc. What I would like is to read the simple code of something that, at the time, seemed like sorcery to me. I like realising how simple these things were and satisfy my nostalgia.

On the other hand... how do we prove that other people will feel the way I do? So, I'm sure guys like Revolution see it my way, now... Neville is right too: others might not see it like that. So don't fight, guys. Arguments start when people "want to not-understand one another". Both of you know what the other one means. And sorry for poking in your business. I only intend a positive impact. Thank you.

https://archive.org/stream/TheLittleBlackBookOfComputerVirusesMarkLudwig/The%20Little%20Black%20Book%20of%20Computer%20Viruses%20-%20Mark%20Ludwig#page/n111/mode/2up

The code was written by Mark Ludwig and its source is published in his book, free on the archive. And as for people studying viruses, I wouldn't be on this forum today if it weren't for DOS viruses. I studied VX heavens tutorials cause, quite frankly, their stuff was better than any free information I could find out there. The little time capsule of a site led me also to try older compilers such as TASM and A86 before finding FASM. I've published two DOS viruses to this site (without backlash I might add) as I believe they are merely educational in today's world. Yes, DOS COM and EXE infectors CAN spread on a modern computer, but then again most computers these days are 64 bit and won't even a 16 bit application without the use of a 3rd party emulator, nor would they be of any harm as they cannot reach the anything valuable in the computer other than user files (to be clear, the viruses I released on here had no "payload" to speak off. They simply replicated and could be uninstalled with ease). I digress, DOS viruses today are innocuous and for informational purposes (what better comparison can you get to biological viruses?), so please don't get up in arms over someone wanting to learn about how they work. Remember, had Symantec and McAfee not studied the deep inner workings of viruses, neither would have ever created the methods that are still being used today in their prevention.

I was planning on inventing a self driving car using DOS and this scares me.


Actually they are the same people who write the viruses.