▲ 640 ▼ WinRAR flaw lets hackers run programs when you open RAR archives (www.bleepingcomputer.com) submitted 3 years ago by TheOneWithTheHair@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 106 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 36 points 3 years ago* (10 children) the only reason anyone still uses this shit is ignorance permalink fedilink source hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] HeneryHawk 7 points 3 years ago (1 child) On a very very rare occasion I've had to use it for scene cracks as other apps didn't work. They use WinRAR to archive it so on those very rare occasions it's the only thing that unpacks it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] justastranger@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 years ago WinRAR also lets you delete files from a RAR archive, 7zip does not. permalink fedilink source parent [–] nicolairathjen@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago For me it’s laziness. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ReluctantMuskrat@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago I bought a lifetime license literally more than 20 years ago to support the developer. I use 7Zip for most stuff but prefer WinRAR for split rar archive support. permalink fedilink source parent [–] severien@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago (5 children) That's, quite ironically, a pretty ignorant opinion. There are areas where WinRAR is stronger than 7zip. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] kattenluik@feddit.nl 2 points 3 years ago (3 children) The person you replied to never mentioned 7-Zip, and there's forks and other programs that are probably just as strong in the same areas. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] severien@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago (2 children) "probably" The commenter implied that there's a tool which is better than WinRAR in everything and therefore there can't possibly be a reason to use WinRAR. Which application is it then? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] kattenluik@feddit.nl 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) I'd need to know the areas you consider 7-Zip to be stronger in first, because I can't think of anything myself. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] severien@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago As an example, RAR provides parity records which allows recovery of large amounts of compressed data in case of data corruption. 7zip can lose all its content if one bit is flipped. RAR provides much more support for underlying file system support which makes it more suitable as an archival tool. Things like NTFS hard links, streams, ACLs, all three timestamps. 7zip doesn't support that. WinRAR in general has way more niche features for advanced use cases, while 7zip focuses on the basics. permalink fedilink source parent [+] nutsack@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HeneryHawk 7 points 3 years ago (1 child) On a very very rare occasion I've had to use it for scene cracks as other apps didn't work. They use WinRAR to archive it so on those very rare occasions it's the only thing that unpacks it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] justastranger@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 years ago WinRAR also lets you delete files from a RAR archive, 7zip does not. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] justastranger@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 years ago WinRAR also lets you delete files from a RAR archive, 7zip does not. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] nicolairathjen@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago For me it’s laziness. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ReluctantMuskrat@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago I bought a lifetime license literally more than 20 years ago to support the developer. I use 7Zip for most stuff but prefer WinRAR for split rar archive support. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] severien@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago (5 children) That's, quite ironically, a pretty ignorant opinion. There are areas where WinRAR is stronger than 7zip. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] kattenluik@feddit.nl 2 points 3 years ago (3 children) The person you replied to never mentioned 7-Zip, and there's forks and other programs that are probably just as strong in the same areas. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] severien@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago (2 children) "probably" The commenter implied that there's a tool which is better than WinRAR in everything and therefore there can't possibly be a reason to use WinRAR. Which application is it then? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] kattenluik@feddit.nl 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) I'd need to know the areas you consider 7-Zip to be stronger in first, because I can't think of anything myself. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] severien@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago As an example, RAR provides parity records which allows recovery of large amounts of compressed data in case of data corruption. 7zip can lose all its content if one bit is flipped. RAR provides much more support for underlying file system support which makes it more suitable as an archival tool. Things like NTFS hard links, streams, ACLs, all three timestamps. 7zip doesn't support that. WinRAR in general has way more niche features for advanced use cases, while 7zip focuses on the basics. permalink fedilink source parent [+] nutsack@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kattenluik@feddit.nl 2 points 3 years ago (3 children) The person you replied to never mentioned 7-Zip, and there's forks and other programs that are probably just as strong in the same areas. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] severien@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago (2 children) "probably" The commenter implied that there's a tool which is better than WinRAR in everything and therefore there can't possibly be a reason to use WinRAR. Which application is it then? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] kattenluik@feddit.nl 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) I'd need to know the areas you consider 7-Zip to be stronger in first, because I can't think of anything myself. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] severien@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago As an example, RAR provides parity records which allows recovery of large amounts of compressed data in case of data corruption. 7zip can lose all its content if one bit is flipped. RAR provides much more support for underlying file system support which makes it more suitable as an archival tool. Things like NTFS hard links, streams, ACLs, all three timestamps. 7zip doesn't support that. WinRAR in general has way more niche features for advanced use cases, while 7zip focuses on the basics. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] severien@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago (2 children) "probably" The commenter implied that there's a tool which is better than WinRAR in everything and therefore there can't possibly be a reason to use WinRAR. Which application is it then? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] kattenluik@feddit.nl 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) I'd need to know the areas you consider 7-Zip to be stronger in first, because I can't think of anything myself. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] severien@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago As an example, RAR provides parity records which allows recovery of large amounts of compressed data in case of data corruption. 7zip can lose all its content if one bit is flipped. RAR provides much more support for underlying file system support which makes it more suitable as an archival tool. Things like NTFS hard links, streams, ACLs, all three timestamps. 7zip doesn't support that. WinRAR in general has way more niche features for advanced use cases, while 7zip focuses on the basics. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kattenluik@feddit.nl 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) I'd need to know the areas you consider 7-Zip to be stronger in first, because I can't think of anything myself. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] severien@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago As an example, RAR provides parity records which allows recovery of large amounts of compressed data in case of data corruption. 7zip can lose all its content if one bit is flipped. RAR provides much more support for underlying file system support which makes it more suitable as an archival tool. Things like NTFS hard links, streams, ACLs, all three timestamps. 7zip doesn't support that. WinRAR in general has way more niche features for advanced use cases, while 7zip focuses on the basics. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] severien@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago As an example, RAR provides parity records which allows recovery of large amounts of compressed data in case of data corruption. 7zip can lose all its content if one bit is flipped. RAR provides much more support for underlying file system support which makes it more suitable as an archival tool. Things like NTFS hard links, streams, ACLs, all three timestamps. 7zip doesn't support that. WinRAR in general has way more niche features for advanced use cases, while 7zip focuses on the basics. permalink fedilink source parent