Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 46

Thread: AV? or NO AV? that is the question.

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Beans
    8

    Re: AV? or NO AV? that is the question.

    Quote Originally Posted by PartisanEntity View Post
    Thanks for the tips on Avast or Comodo, I will look in to them a little more.
    Your welcome, it is my pleasure to be of help.

    Quote Originally Posted by lisati View Post
    My one and only experience with comodo was on a Windows machine a few years ago. It wasn't pleasent, because it didn't find something which subsequently did something nasty to my system...... Things might have changed in the meantime.
    Was it only the AV or the internet suite?
    Because realistically comodo AV is definitely NOT the best AV there is. But I believe that it is the best full security suite that there is.
    So my experience with comodo is with the internet suite, it includes the HIPS and firewall, plus my browsing practices are pretty safe. Therefore to me the most important thing is prevention, and comodo is great at doing that.
    Also for more experienced users comodo allows a greater degree of customization which is generally not found in free suites.
    But if you are looking at AV specifically there have been many tests which show bitdefender to be the best there is. On windows there's also 360safe...it uses 3 AV engines, bitdefender included, and it provides an even greater degree of security, but it is not a suite, and personally I prefer suites.

    On linux I am currently using comodo AV, but I would happily switch back to bitdefender if they started developing again their linux software.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Waikikamukau, New Zealand
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: AV? or NO AV? that is the question.

    My experience of comodo was with the AV only, not the internet suite. These days, I tend to use AVG on my Windows installations, mainly out of familiarity. I haven't bothered on my Ubuntu installation.
    Forum DOs and DON'Ts
    Never assume that information you find using a search engine is up-to-date.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Beans
    3,225

    Re: AV? or NO AV? that is the question.

    ClamTk, v4.45
    Thu Apr 3 03:42:37 2014
    ClamAV Signatures: 3290609
    Directories Scanned:
    /media/keith/Verbatim/windows

    Found 1 possible threat (4 files scanned).

    /media/keith/Verbatim/windows/FSViewerSetup37.exe Win.Trojan.Downloader-5319


    Glad I checked - just some old files that I never use now ........... but the directory contained this above.
    deleted now .........

    But will do a thorough search of all my older files and recursive scan through the /home on each drive now.



    Here is a interesting one .... my computer has Windows 7 on it and I have never really used it since buying the computer
    ...... yet it has a pdf file that has a signature for a virus on it .... unless its not a proper virus ... never quite sure what
    types of threats they check for nowadays . ( no threat if I do not go into it anyway - as it will not delete from linux )

    Found 1 possible threat (27629 files scanned). on the Windows 7 partition.

    /media/keith/OS/Program Files (x86)/Adobe/Acrobat 6.0/Reader/Messages/ENU/RdrMsgENU.pdf Heuristics.Encrypted.PDF

    I think in answer to the initial question in this discussion - yes ..... to AV ...... and not to miss things by not to AV.

    Even though the things I have found so far only posed a threat if I had used wine to run them - or to run them direct on a Windows system.

    Better safe than sorry as once embedded in systems take some removing - which usually seems to be safe - using a clean install.

    Good post as this is the first time in 5 years that a virus check has been run on this computer - so how many Linux only viruses have

    been found up todate ?
    Last edited by 23dornot23d; April 3rd, 2014 at 09:25 AM. Reason: added the action taken - steps now taken

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Beans
    8

    Re: AV? or NO AV? that is the question.

    Quote Originally Posted by lisati View Post
    My experience of comodo was with the AV only, not the internet suite. These days, I tend to use AVG on my Windows installations, mainly out of familiarity. I haven't bothered on my Ubuntu installation.
    Yeah as I had thought, Comodo is not well known for its AV. But as a internet suite it is a whole different game, and IMO it is the best FREE security suite available.

    Something interesting I thought I would post is this article by AV TEST: http://www.av-test.org/en/news/news-...ng-windows-81/

    It tested the best internet suites on windows 8.1 To be honest I was surprised with Comodo's performance XD I never expected it would be so good.

    Also was I surprised to find that Avast actually a low detection rate, I overestimated it. And assuming that the scanning engine architecture is the same on both windows and linux this would definitely reinforce my choice in having Comodo AV for my linux box.

    Also for you lisati, since you use AVG I wouldn't recommend it, I already wasn't a big fan, but the test only confirms what I already thought.

    Quote Originally Posted by 23dornot23d View Post
    Good post as this is the first time in 5 years that a virus check has been run on this computer - so how many Linux only viruses have

    been found up todate ?
    Actually a good question, I already knew that Linux malware already existed. But I wasn't exactly sure of how many. So had to do some extra research myself.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_malware
    https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Linuxvirus

    These are the best lists I could find. It seems like it doesn't go higher than 50 in any list that I find. Which is a good thing, and also they don't seem to be plaguing the linux world which is even better.
    But it still shows that they exist and it all depends on your own security to keep them at bay.

    I hope this answered your questions.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Beans
    3,225

    Re: AV? or NO AV? that is the question.

    Thats great thanks ........ ( and how many exist on Windows - and who paid them to do all that work ? ) this to me is the more interesting question as a lot of
    firms make and made a lot of money - almost like the protection racket in the USA .... where if the bars did not have protection or insurance from their place
    getting burnt down ....... then sometimes out of the blue it got burnt down or destroyed ........... ( sometimes - like the very next day. )

    Sort of makes you wonder how this sort of racket gets started off ........ what motivation does it take that is stronger than money to get people doing this type
    of thing.

    Willl have a search see if the same type of effort goes into detection on Linux ...... or if the threat never raises its head to affect a lot of computers then why
    would anyone bother .......... more to nowadays surveillance of computers than meets the eye though ...... and they only have to sit there quietly watching for
    things that may be of interest to them ....... a virus maybe nowadays does not mean to destroy things - but just gain access to many computers.

    Never really got into this in a big way - other than when running windows - and it seemed a routine to clear away 20 - 30 exploits on regular intervals .....

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Beans
    37

    Re: AV? or NO AV? that is the question.

    Quote Originally Posted by gabriel13 View Post

    Something interesting I thought I would post is this article by AV TEST: http://www.av-test.org/en/news/news-...ng-windows-81/

    It tested the best internet suites on windows 8.1 To be honest I was surprised with Comodo's performance XD I never expected it would be so good.

    Also was I surprised to find that Avast actually a low detection rate, I overestimated it. And assuming that the scanning engine architecture is the same on both windows and linux this would definitely reinforce my choice in having Comodo AV for my linux box.
    Comodo antivirus for linux (CAVL) has not been updated in over a year. It will not run on any kernel beyond 3.5 (redirect driver issue). You can find a completely unofficial patch on their forum - but if you are concerned about security enough to want to install a linux AV I can't really see why you would then load a patch from an unknown source.

    PS - CAVL would run on kernels beyond 3.5 as an on demand scanner - but without the redirect driver there would be no real-time/on access functionality. Avast for linux is, I gather, now a paid for product only as of next Monday.
    Last edited by maglin2; April 3rd, 2014 at 06:59 PM.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Beans
    783

    Re: AV? or NO AV? that is the question.

    Great links. This might change my opinion, slightly, but not much. Patch regularly and don't be stupid.
    Last edited by ant2ne; April 3rd, 2014 at 06:49 PM.
    Registered Linux User: 450747 Registered Ubuntu User: 16269

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Beans
    8

    Re: AV? or NO AV? that is the question.

    Quote Originally Posted by 23dornot23d View Post
    Thats great thanks ........ ( and how many exist on Windows - and who paid them to do all that work ? ) this to me is the more interesting question as a lot of
    firms make and made a lot of money - almost like the protection racket in the USA .... where if the bars did not have protection or insurance from their place
    getting burnt down ....... then sometimes out of the blue it got burnt down or destroyed ........... ( sometimes - like the very next day. )

    Sort of makes you wonder how this sort of racket gets started off ........ what motivation does it take that is stronger than money to get people doing this type
    of thing.

    Willl have a search see if the same type of effort goes into detection on Linux ...... or if the threat never raises its head to affect a lot of computers then why
    would anyone bother .......... more to nowadays surveillance of computers than meets the eye though ...... and they only have to sit there quietly watching for
    things that may be of interest to them ....... a virus maybe nowadays does not mean to destroy things - but just gain access to many computers.
    Well on windows there are actually around 50.000 viruses in circulation, with some estimates reaching close to 80.000. And generally people are not paid for building malware, although some are, generally the malware are built to get the money, such as steal bank data, make fake transactions, collect data to sell to other companies. Others just do it for fun. It is a challenge to build a good malware, and some are real pieces of art...underground you can get high reps for this kind of thing, its like a hacker's portfolio.

    On linux there is no where near the same amount of effort to detect malware...simply because there is no need for it. And malware, viruses in specific, has never meant to destroy things. This is a common misconception, very few were actually built to destroy things. It just defeats the purpose for which it was created. Viruses if it is going to replicate and infect other systems, the system which is already infected needs to survive long enough for that virus to infect another before the system is destroyed. And if the virus wants to accomplish other stuff like accessing data etc... the infected system needs to live longer than that.

    Quote Originally Posted by maglin2 View Post
    Comodo antivirus for linux (CAVL) has not been updated in over a year. It will not run on any kernel beyond 3.5 (redirect driver issue). You can find a completely unofficial patch on their forum - but if you are concerned about security enough to want to install a linux AV I can't really see why you would then load a patch from an unknown source.

    PS - CAVL would run on kernels beyond 3.5 as an on demand scanner - but without the redirect driver there would be no real-time/on access functionality. Avast for linux is, I gather, now a paid for product only as of next Monday.
    True, you are right, but Comodo's one year is much better than bitdefender's 4 years. Plus on linux having a real-time scanner would not be worth the memory and processing time. Therefore an on-demand scanner is perfect. And about avast...I searched and ddnt find anything. I guess it will be obvious after monday right??

    Quote Originally Posted by ant2ne View Post
    Great links. This might change my opinion, slightly, but not much. Patch regularly and don't be stupid.
    Sure And yeah you're right, on a linux the main thing is to patch/update regularly...and definitely don't be stupid. Thank you!!

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Beans
    783

    Re: AV? or NO AV? that is the question.

    I had a hard time finding avast as well. I could only find the link from another site not belonging to avast. The link was for the avast.com's download area but I couldn't find it from avast.com's site anywhere. Almost as thought they aren't 'really' supporting it.
    Registered Linux User: 450747 Registered Ubuntu User: 16269

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Beans
    37

    Re: AV? or NO AV? that is the question.

    From these posts on the avast forum.
    http://forum.avast.com/index.php?top...148#msg1059148
    http://forum.avast.com/index.php?top...513#msg1078513
    http://forum.avast.com/index.php?top...986#msg1060986
    It seems that the advent of their paid linux server product isn't quite the death knell for their previous free scanner but is a 'very significant nail in the coffin' (the free scanner uses avast 4VPS - which will die in the near(ish) future)

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •