Re: regarding viruses attacks less in linux
Quote:
Originally Posted by
LowSky
But a linux machine can play host to a windows virus, which can infect windows mahines. a user could potentially download a windows virus that will do nothing in linux but if a windows computer accesses that drive it could end up harming windows.
No. Again that falls under the super user permission system. Even if you mounted your Windows hard drive in Linux, it would be in /media/windows. /media is on the root directory and requires the use of sudo to write to that folder. Without super user access, nothing will "spread".
Re: regarding viruses attacks less in linux
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jeffus_il
Also the virus writers are hackers who are more likely to be sympathetic to Linux
The people who write viruses and worms aren't sympathetic to any group, that's the whole point.
Re: regarding viruses attacks less in linux
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jeffus_il
Also the virus writers are hackers who are more likely to be sympathetic to Linux
It's called crackers, not hackers!
That is a major difference.
Also, most people refer to kernel-writers (Linus Torvalds and Co.) as hackers.
Re: regarding viruses attacks less in linux
Quote:
Originally Posted by
~LoKe
No. Again that falls under the super user permission system. Even if you mounted your Windows hard drive in Linux, it would be in /media/windows. /media is on the root directory and requires the use of sudo to write to that folder. Without super user access, nothing will "spread".
You can, however, mount your ext2 partitions in Windows very easily, using drivers that ignore the permissions and let you do anything to all the files there.
Re: regarding viruses attacks less in linux
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Steveway
It's called crackers, not hackers!
That is a major difference.
Also, most people refer to kernel-writers (Linus Torvalds and Co.) as hackers.
Sorry bud, but someone who writes viruses is a hacker not just a cracker. There are several different types of hackers, the most prominent two would be white hat and black hat hackers.
White hat hackers are the guys who mostly go around trying to find vulnerabilities in the systems of random businesses and tell them how to fix it. Lots of people make a living off this; they don't always do it for free. ;)
Black hat hackers are basically the ones who find and exploit security vulnerabilities for their own personal/political gain.
Re: regarding viruses attacks less in linux
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jken146
You can, however, mount your ext2 partitions in Windows very easily, using drivers that ignore the permissions and let you do anything to all the files there.
That's a Windows problem. And still, I'm almost certain that an app like explore2fs won't allow you to write to the ext2/3 partition (but it cold still be formatted).
Re: regarding viruses attacks less in linux
Quote:
Originally Posted by
~LoKe
Not true. Linux is often the target for attacks, including viruses. The major difference is Linux generally has a permission system in place to ensure that nothing can spread to critical areas.
Alright, but this not the issue for desktop users is it? I suppose it's regarding servers, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
~LoKe
Vista/Windows XP can be exceptionally secure, if you know what you're doing. The main difference is still the permission system, which could be "partially" solved by running Windows and using an account that doesn't have administrator access.
I never said Windows was insecure, but that Linux were safer. One point as you said, root/admin is not enabled by default. This has been fixed in Vista though (UAC), but in such a way that many disables it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
~LoKe
Not sure where you heard that, but no virus will spread from Linux to Windows.
I heard it in almost every thread regarding viruses on this forum. There's a reason for ClamAV picks up Windows viruses isn't it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
~LoKe
Firestarter is just a graphical interface for IPTables.
IPTables is turned off by default. You do not need Firestarter to restrict ports, but most people prefer a graphical frontend.
Re: regarding viruses attacks less in linux
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ub1476
Alright, but this not the issue for desktop users is it? I suppose it's regarding servers, right?
A desktop computer is an unlikely target for a "hacker" or "cracker", but if someone were spreading viruses/worms around they would try to infect anyone and anything. Not that they'd get far....Servers are more on the receiving end of direct attacks by someone trying to get unauthorized access. A much bigger issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ub1476
I never said Windows was insecure, but that Linux were safer. One point as you said, root/admin is not enabled by default. This has been fixed in Vista though (UAC), but in such a way that many disables it.
I wasn't disagreeing with you, simply saying that Windows could be secure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ub1476
I heard it in almost every thread regarding viruses on this forum. There's a reason for ClamAV picks up Windows viruses isn't it?
ClamAV probably shares a database with both clients. I don't use AV software because there's no need for it. However, I think it's just in case you've already let it spread. It can't write to the root folder without the permissions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ub1476
IPTables is turned off by default. You do not need Firestarter to restrict ports, but most people prefer a graphical frontend.
IPTables is never "off" as far as I know, but there are generally no rules by default.
Re: regarding viruses attacks less in linux
Quote:
Originally Posted by
~LoKe
That's a Windows problem. And still, I'm almost certain that an app like explore2fs won't allow you to write to the ext2/3 partition (but it cold still be formatted).
The ext2IFS driver at fs-driver.org allows you to write to ext2/3 partitions.
And you're right, it is a Windows problem, but a problem nonetheless. If someone downloads a windows virus in Linux and saves it on an ext3 partition, then mounts that partition in Windows, they can run the virus. Of course if they had anti virus sortware for Windows with some sort of constantly running protection thy might not be able to run the thing. It's not something Linux can do a lot about.
Re: regarding viruses attacks less in linux
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ub1476
I heard it in almost every thread regarding viruses on this forum. There's a reason for ClamAV picks up Windows viruses isn't it?
This isn't because linux allows the virus to spread, it's because infected files can be sitting on a linux system (doing nothing harmful) and get passed on to a Windows system (where it will do something harmful).
Linux users use ClamAV to make sure that everything on their system is clean. Files infected with Windows viruses will not do anything to linux.