PDA

View Full Version : Is Antivirus Software needed for Linux?



galgoz
January 15th, 2006, 07:58 AM
I just read the thread about AVG being available for linux and it was my understanding that Linux users didn't need AV or Spyware removal software. So what do you think?

dueY
January 15th, 2006, 08:03 AM
You could scan a Windows partition from Linux if you couldn't boot into it anymore.

DigitalDuality
January 15th, 2006, 08:11 AM
While i would never pay for one...

I do think that an AV is good for 2 things..
#1. To be on the safe side
#2 To protect you from acting as a carrier for viruses.

kenweill
January 15th, 2006, 08:12 AM
I don't know.

I guess, only if you accept incoming connections. Or you offer services.

drizek
January 15th, 2006, 08:30 AM
only to protect windows. there are no real linux viruses.

Bandit
January 15th, 2006, 09:24 AM
No not directly for Linux, but it will make your windows users little happier :)

I will add there were about 40 Viruses created for Linux in a lab enviroment.
Only a few were ever released into the wild.
So you have a much better chance winning the lottery then getting a linux virus.

Gowator
January 15th, 2006, 09:30 AM
While i would never pay for one...

I do think that an AV is good for 2 things..
#1. To be on the safe side
#2 To protect you from acting as a carrier for viruses.
I think #2 is most important... you don't want to eMail a friend at work and have them sacked because you sent them a virus :D

Making sure you don't spread viri is no different to being a cholera carrier and infecting others. Just because you can't be affected doesn't adsolve basic reponsibility

BSDFreak
January 15th, 2006, 09:56 AM
While i would never pay for one...

I do think that an AV is good for 2 things..
#1. To be on the safe side
#2 To protect you from acting as a carrier for viruses.

Yup, and if pretty much everyone uses one it gives the virus creators yet another reason not to make a virus for Linux.

Of course, worms are what causes most headache nowadays and for that a firewall is the best protection.

awakatanka
January 15th, 2006, 10:04 AM
I think yes, to be on the save side else you just as ignorance as a windows user. For every OS there is a possibilty that someone target it.

A good article on desktoplinux :

http://www.desktoplinux.com/articles/AT3307459975.html

GeneralZod
January 15th, 2006, 10:29 AM
I'm not generally one to bury my head in the sand when it comes to problems with Linux, but in this case I voted "No"; security in desktop Linux is already pretty good, and the fact that everything is open source and can be re-compiled with buffer overflow/ stack protection, along with initiatives like SELinux (which I hope will become fairly soon), means that it should keep on getting better. The fact that most software comes from repositories is also a good thing as I view it as unlikely (but certainly possible) that any malware could be kept in there, and certainly not in any large quantity for any large amount of time.

Plus, the fact is that desktop Linux users really are and will be for quite some time "under the radar" (although servers are actively targetted) - there could be an easily exploitable buffer overflow in Konqueror tomorrow, and I doubt the malware community would bat an eyelid.

So for the next few years at least, I personally will be running a firewall and nothing more - most security threats, as I see them, are likely to be based on social-engineering that a relatively savvy person won't fall for :)

BWF89
January 15th, 2006, 02:15 PM
I'd play it on the safe side and run an anti-virus for Linux viruses every once in awhile.