GOG.com on RAR vs DRM

A thread on GOG.com discusses a recent change to the installers the online marketplace provides for the games it sells that's causing problems for some users (thanks DSOGaming). At issue is the use of password-protected compressed RAR files that cannot be opened by the innoextract utility favored by many Linux users. The thread covers attempts to workaround this situation with and without using WINE, and some unhappy users have called this a form of DRM from a company that has made a reputation by being anti-DRM. There's a post from GOG.com explaining their reasoning:
Malware pushers tend to be better, and any protection can be broken (as this thread shows), but AFAIK innounp doesn't unpack the compiled code, just the resources, so it's not the same thing. Plus, a repacked installer won't have the digital signature, so it can be easily distinguished (Windows shows a notification if you run unsigned downloaded exe).

The browser actually identifies the archive very well (it is a rar file after all). The problem is when the only downloaded things are the rar files, without the installer exe, or even only the first part of the multi-part archive. And if I try to add any more protection from extracting such a download, then you'll have even more work to break that :-P Current solution works well enough for that purpose.

Thanks for the input though. I listen to your feedback and try to add requested features to the Installer, so if there are any ideas than can be integrated with the current design and requirements, I'm open to try :-)

As for Wine... Well, it's not really officially supported. I added a /nogui switch some time ago for that purpose, because it was a feature requested by some users. For now it's not working due to other updates which had higher priority. I'll look into getting it working again.