Are we Linux users arrogant about security?


Recommended Posts

Regarding viruses on Linux, this article is resourceful: http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/

 

I never said it couldn't, I have pointed this out to Linux users in the past, all systems are hack-able and can have viruses, not all Linux users are the same, I often go back to Windows because of the elitist attitude I get on the forum of the distro I use due to the attitude of some the responses, not even one who uses Linux knows how to use it right out the door, and often people will require help to find a solution to their issue, if they want Linux to become widely used on the desktop they need to drop said attitude, then again that attitude isnt  just on Linux, Mac and Windows has plenty of people like it too

Gnu/Linux will not become a mainstream PC operating system. It is matching the choice of niche people mostly geeky and those who like DIY stuff. If indeed Linux was a competitor for Desktop OS, it'd have already been very popular. This will not happen in Desktop/PC arena. Elsewhere - in Servers, embedded systems Linux is deemed a success. It can run fine on headless systems. But, when a average joe wants to use Linux on a personal computer, he/she will find it regressive or not appealing/have sharp corners/no software choices and lastly disagrees to learn the new operating system.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think GNU/Linux is intrinsically more secure than Windows as far as the operating system goes but it is largely helped by major distributions having packages instead of relying on users knowing where to get un-doctored versions of software to install. Often there's just no need to do anything other than install the OS and select the packages you need.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can either choose to be pedantic, or follow the thread whereby  "PC" is generally taken to mean Windows running on an IBM clone.  Your choice really!

Well I have to correct myself. Back in the day when Macs were running on PowerPC's the statement was actually more accurate. But reality stays the same - as long as there's something to go for, any platform would get hacked eventually. It's mostly about market share and high percentage of unskilled userbase among it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it's been said many times, but, regardless of your OS, it's wise, I think, to use a VPN whenever connecting to any public networks (cafes, schools, hotels, gyms, brothels). It helps keep the information you're transmitting and receiving safe from LOCAL prying eyes/people snooping wifi traffic.

There is also the use of a hosts file to block dangerous sites.

I've used Linux for many years as my main OS, though I also use OSX and Windows regularly too. I do have a wifi firewall, as is normal, but I do run ufw on Linux, which is a firewall of sorts. I don't know that it adds much to the mix.

I agree with Haggis about the need for niceness in the forums as it makes things a lot better for everyone. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe to the technically unaware crowd. 

Windows viruses is accurate, PC viruses is not. Do you not call GNU/Linux machines PCs as well?

As I said in the post - the TREND IN THIS TOPIC is that a PC is a Windows machine, that is what was being argue.  Carry on being pedantic though, it really makes you seem informed and a great guy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well they did quote it as "We cant get PC virus" but most seemed to believe that they couldn't get any virus

^^^This right here. I have had to set many customers straight on this when they come in after their computer had been infected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said in the post - the TREND IN THIS TOPIC is that a PC is a Windows machine, that is what was being argue.  Carry on being pedantic though, it really makes you seem informed and a great guy!

Yeah...you aren't doing yourself any favors in looking informed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah...you aren't doing yourself any favors in looking informed.

 

Still, at least I can follow a thread without dredging up old 1990's arguments about "what defines a PC" when it's not actually relevant by the 4th page.  Go you!  Team Adrynalyne FTW!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still, at least I can follow a thread without dredging up old 1990's arguments about "what defines a PC" when it's not actually relevant by the 4th page.  Go you!  Team Adrynalyne FTW!

You must feel threatened to make things personal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So just out of curiosity after reading this thread, I was curious about whether ClamAV was actually being updated.  I had BitDefender for Unices installed (free home user license) but the interface for it crashed 2 or 3 times so I just removed it.  Whenever I would open ClamTK and click "Update" I never actually saw anything happening, so I started poking around.  Apparently ClamAV has a daemon that runs in the background like once an hour and pulls in updated virus definitions, and apparently the people who  maintain ClamAV actually publish updated virus definitions several times a day.

I would be curious to see its detection rate, including Windows viruses since I don't want to pass them along, compared to other popular free alternatives like BitDefender, Avira, AVG, Avast!, etc.  I have very little concern about viruses getting onto my computer, but I work on computers for other people, and one thing I do is back up their personal data before doing a re-image, and I usually scan them for viruses before restoring those files.

Edit: Pulled these lines from my system log.

Nov  1 01:19:12 marcus-laptop freshclam[565]: Received signal: wake up
Nov  1 01:19:12 marcus-laptop freshclam[565]: ClamAV update process started at Sun Nov  1 01:19:12 2015
Nov  1 01:19:12 marcus-laptop freshclam[565]: main.cvd is up to date (version: 55, sigs: 2424225, f-level: 60, builder: neo)
Nov  1 01:19:12 marcus-laptop freshclam[565]: daily.cld is up to date (version: 21031, sigs: 1645560, f-level: 63, builder: neo)
Nov  1 01:19:12 marcus-laptop freshclam[565]: bytecode.cld is up to date (version: 269, sigs: 47, f-level: 63, builder: anvilleg)
Edited by Gerowen
added logs from freshclam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I say internal threats, I'm generally talking about malware, rootkits, and viruses running on the desktop system.......

You get viruses, rookits and malware on Linux boxes too thoguh so your point is mute

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello,

Here's an article I wrote at work:  Do you really need antivirus software for Linux desktops?

There are several interesting comments on the article, too (which is nice; I don't tend to get too much feedback from my readers).

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well there's a lovely cop-out for you to take I guess...

Sorry, were you expecting me to fire personal attacks back at you?

I'm not stooping to your level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello,

Here's an article I wrote at work:  Do you really need antivirus software for Linux desktops?

There are several interesting comments on the article, too (which is nice; I don't tend to get too much feedback from my readers).

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

Thanks for that interesting piece! I have to admit that I don't use any anti-virus or any such software on my Linux machine, but I've not had any problems of which I am aware since I started using Linux in 2007. Like Richard, I have Windows (Windows 7 in my case) and it's in a VM. I only let it connect to the internet for Windows updates. It's nice for me to be able to use Windows software and all when I need to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I have Windows (Windows 7 in my case) and it's in a VM. 

from my experience that's probably the best place to run windows. :yes:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that's what you call not stooping to your level...

Yes yes, you can pretend to take some sort of high-ground, but it's faux - your passive aggressive comments are completely transparent.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, were you expecting me to fire personal attacks back at you?

I'm not stooping to your level.

don't feed him, he is known for trolling these boards and resulting to personal attacks. At one point, he said he would leave neowin because "it had gone down the drain." I wish he had stuck to that to be honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello,

I don't necessarily know if you do need to run anti-malware software on your Linux desktop yet.  Even 11 months later, I'm still not seeing a major uptick in Linux-based malware targeting the desktop.  Overall, I think Linux desktop users tend to be more technical than their Windows counterparts but there are also quite a bit less of them.  I suspect that a good deal of desktop Linux' lack of threats is more attributable to the fact it isn't economically viable for criminals to invest in developing malware for it--they have to go where they'll get the highest return on investment, and right now that's Windows.

If someone makes a Linux distro that truly takes off in the desktop space, we may see the kinds of threats now happening with Linux-derived Android.  Which just goes to show you how something that started out being thought of as secure can be shown as being less secure when enough eyeballs are exposed to it.

Right now, the biggest problem area emerging seems to be with embedded systems.  There are a lot of residential broadband gateway router and modem manufacturers out there who don't do a good job of shipping or providing updates.  And having the device through which all network traffic, both Internet and LAN, flows being compromised is not a good thing.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

Thanks for that interesting piece! I have to admit that I don't use any anti-virus or any such software on my Linux machine, but I've not had any problems of which I am aware since I started using Linux in 2007. Like Richard, I have Windows (Windows 7 in my case) and it's in a VM. I only let it connect to the internet for Windows updates. It's nice for me to be able to use Windows software and all when I need to.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my experience, the quality of security one employs is linked to their skill level and/or experience. The overwhelming majority of computer users worldwide simply aren't tech literate to the point where they use any sophisticated form of security. Hell, even some who are reasonable literate will neglect certain security measures if they feel that they are bothersome (I know way too many people who ignore 2FA because they think it is inconvenient).

Everyone should take security seriously. Don't be complacent about any potential threat regardless of platform.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.