Do you need antivirus software for Linux?

[statik213]

I'm running Fedora and am developing java software on it, is there really a need for AntiVirus software on a linux platform?

 

[n0cmonkey]

No.

 

[pcthuglife]

it's free so why not?
http://www.f-prot.com/products/home_use/linux/

 

[Deinonych]

To the point, you don't need one if you never run "untrusted" executables while logged in as the root user (or equivalent).

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: pcthuglife
it's free so why not?
http://www.f-prot.com/products/home_use/linux/

Because there are no real Linux viruses.

 

[spyordie007]

Originally posted by: Deinonych
To the point, you don't need one if you never run "untrusted" executables while logged in as the root user (or equivalent).

You could make the same statement about Windows.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Deinonych
To the point, you don't need one if you never run "untrusted" executables while logged in as the root user (or equivalent).

You'd have to worry about trojaned binaries more than viruses. And you'd have to worry about that if you're downloading source too, since there have been reports of trojaned source.

 

[Deinonych]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
You'd have to worry about trojaned binaries more than viruses. And you'd have to worry about that if you're downloading source too, since there have been reports of trojaned source.

True. But that's pretty unlikely given the paranoia in the open-source community.

Here's an interesting article that talks about viruses and Linux.

 

[Deinonych]

Originally posted by: spyordie007

Originally posted by: Deinonych
To the point, you don't need one if you never run "untrusted" executables while logged in as the root user (or equivalent).

You could make the same statement about Windows.

Yes. Yes, you could.

I would hope that the average Linux user is more technically (and security) savvy than the average Windows user, however.

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: spyordie007

Originally posted by: Deinonych
To the point, you don't need one if you never run "untrusted" executables while logged in as the root user (or equivalent).

You could make the same statement about Windows.

except that windows runs them for you without asking. Browse to a site in Mozilla on linux, and the same site on IE in windows, and you could get the sniffles in one, not the other.

 

[pcthuglife]

I still dont see how it could hurt to run an antivirus program once a day or even once a week. My network has windows machines on it as well and just because a virus can't harm my linux box, I don't like the idea of having a virus sitting on my computer with a bunch of Windows machines surrounding me. Maybe I'm just paranoid.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: pcthuglife
I still dont see how it could hurt to run an antivirus program once a day or even once a week. My network has windows machines on it as well and just because a virus can't harm my linux box, I don't like the idea of having a virus sitting on my computer with a bunch of Windows machines surrounding me. Maybe I'm just paranoid.

There's nothing wrong with that. In fact, it's probably encouraged by many people. But then it isn't antivirus for linux, it's antivirus for Windows. Running on Linux.

 

[statik213]

Well that's good to know. I don't think i'm going to be using any antivirii software on my machine.... Thanks for the article Deinonych....

 

[spyordie007]

Originally posted by: Deinonych

Originally posted by: spyordie007

Originally posted by: Deinonych
To the point, you don't need one if you never run "untrusted" executables while logged in as the root user (or equivalent).

You could make the same statement about Windows.

Yes. Yes, you could.

I would hope that the average Linux user is more technically (and security) savvy than the average Windows user, however.

Just because there are a lot of technically savvy people who use linux doesnt mean *all* of them are

except that windows runs them for you without asking. Browse to a site in Mozilla on linux, and the same site on IE in windows, and you could get the sniffles in one, not the other.

You're assuming that the users are logged in as local admin. For users logged in without administrative privilages this argument is moot.

your root user logged in to a linux machine can cause at least as much (if not more) damage if they run "unsafe" code

Here's an interesting article that talks about viruses and Linux.

The biggest point that article makes is that malicious code cannot harm the system any more than the logged in user can. See my comment above, restrict user's privilages and this seems petty.

 

[bersl2]

Originally posted by: spyordie007

Originally posted by: Deinonych

Originally posted by: spyordie007

Originally posted by: Deinonych
To the point, you don't need one if you never run "untrusted" executables while logged in as the root user (or equivalent).

You could make the same statement about Windows.

Yes. Yes, you could.

I would hope that the average Linux user is more technically (and security) savvy than the average Windows user, however.

Just because there are a lot of technically savvy people who use linux doesnt mean *all* of them are

except that windows runs them for you without asking. Browse to a site in Mozilla on linux, and the same site on IE in windows, and you could get the sniffles in one, not the other.

You're assuming that the users are logged in as local admin. For users logged in without administrative privilages this argument is moot.

your root user logged in to a linux machine can cause at least as much (if not more) damage if they run "unsafe" code

Here's an interesting article that talks about viruses and Linux.

The biggest point that article makes is that malicious code cannot harm the system any more than the logged in user can. See my comment above, restrict user's privilages and this seems petty.

Unless you also have a local root exploit to use. These haven't mattered very much in the Windows domain, since privilege separation is a relatively new concept, at least on the desktop; but now the stress applied to that barrier is going to be raised to the next level whenever Windows (finally) brings it to the unwashed masses.

 

[sourceninja]

The only antivirus I have ever seen for linux checks for windows virus's. Mainly for email and samba shares to prevent spreading windows virus's to windows users.

The only things you have to worry about in linux are downloading and running something as root you do not trust. If you do that, you are a fool. If you get "hacked" on your user account, nothing to worry about. Plus, most virus's are gotten through exploits in outlook, IE, or java. And linux doesn't have to worry about outlook or IE, and most java virus's are looking for windows files/folders. So unless you download a shell script and run it as root that installs a backdoor, your safe.

Rule of the day.

DO NOT EVER EVER EVER EVER RUN ANYTHING AS ROOT IF YOU DO NOT KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT DOES.

 

[daniel49]

quote:

DO NOT EVER EVER EVER EVER RUN ANYTHING AS ROOT IF YOU DO NOT KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT DOES.

Being new to linux I very seldom know what anything exactly does.
And I can't think of how many times (in fedora especially) I had to run things at root to get them to work.
Would probably still be sitting with my original desktop configuration.
Seems to be less of a problem in ubuntu.
So I am not sure if this is practical advice.
I'm not real worried about it anyway, linux is more of a novelty for me at this point if something goes fubar, can always wipe and pave.

 

[P0ldy]

Originally posted by: daniel49
Being new to linux I very seldom know what anything exactly does.
And I can't think of how many times (in fedora especially) I had to run things at root to get them to work.
Would probably still be sitting with my original desktop configuration.

Let me be the first to tell you can use rm -rf / as root to check for and clean up viruses.

What, don't you trust me? (note: don't trust me.)

The point is, running something as root without knowing what it does is stupid. Unless it's a distro-specific GUI tool that prompts for your passwd before it starts, you should always man [command] before you run something as root.

 

[spyordie007]

Originally posted by: P0ldy

Originally posted by: daniel49
Being new to linux I very seldom know what anything exactly does.
And I can't think of how many times (in fedora especially) I had to run things at root to get them to work.
Would probably still be sitting with my original desktop configuration.

Let me be the first to tell you can use rm -rf / as root to check for and clean up viruses.

What, don't you trust me? (note: don't trust me.)

The point is, running something as root without knowing what it does is stupid. Unless it's a distro-specific GUI tool that prompts for your passwd before it starts, you should always man [command] before you run something as root.

Not that there is a Linux virus scanner that could check this but your example would be a good reason for one to exist. Especially if/as more of those less savvy folks use it. A virus scanner could save you from yourself if it was capable of stopping this from happening.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: spyordie007

Originally posted by: P0ldy

Originally posted by: daniel49
Being new to linux I very seldom know what anything exactly does.
And I can't think of how many times (in fedora especially) I had to run things at root to get them to work.
Would probably still be sitting with my original desktop configuration.

Let me be the first to tell you can use rm -rf / as root to check for and clean up viruses.

What, don't you trust me? (note: don't trust me.)

The point is, running something as root without knowing what it does is stupid. Unless it's a distro-specific GUI tool that prompts for your passwd before it starts, you should always man [command] before you run something as root.

Not that there is a Linux virus scanner that could check this but your example would be a good reason for one to exist. Especially if/as more of those less savvy folks use it. A virus scanner could save you from yourself if it was capable of stopping this from happening.

It's not the job of the OS to stop a user from shooting himself in the foot.

 

[spyordie007]

right, that job is typically handed off to virus scanners and the like

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: spyordie007
right, that job is typically handed off to virus scanners and the like

It's not their job to tell me I can't rm -rf / if I want.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: spyordie007

Originally posted by: P0ldy

Originally posted by: daniel49
Being new to linux I very seldom know what anything exactly does.
And I can't think of how many times (in fedora especially) I had to run things at root to get them to work.
Would probably still be sitting with my original desktop configuration.

Let me be the first to tell you can use rm -rf / as root to check for and clean up viruses.

What, don't you trust me? (note: don't trust me.)

The point is, running something as root without knowing what it does is stupid. Unless it's a distro-specific GUI tool that prompts for your passwd before it starts, you should always man [command] before you run something as root.

Not that there is a Linux virus scanner that could check this but your example would be a good reason for one to exist. Especially if/as more of those less savvy folks use it. A virus scanner could save you from yourself if it was capable of stopping this from happening.

I've never needed to run anything as root that didn't come with the distro or from the package repository. I don't always understand exactly what they do but I trust where they came from (if I didn't there'd be no point in using the distro at all). If there's a piece of software that I want to install but I'm not sure about, I login in as a test user and check it out. The only use that I would have for a virus checker is for the occasional package that can't install properly without root, but those could be scanned once without wasting resources doing a system-wide scan. Add to that the fact that there is no database of linux virus signatures and that any exploit is likely to be a one-off, undetectable by a scanner, and the only use that I see left for a scanner is to get windows viruses.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: sourceninja
Plus, most virus's are gotten through exploits in outlook, IE, or java.

Can you give some examples of java holes that have actually be exploited? The only thing I've heard about is the odd advisory that's patched before being announced and never amounts to anything. I'm not challenging you, just curious

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: P0ldy

Originally posted by: daniel49
Being new to linux I very seldom know what anything exactly does.
And I can't think of how many times (in fedora especially) I had to run things at root to get them to work.
Would probably still be sitting with my original desktop configuration.

Let me be the first to tell you can use rm -rf / as root to check for and clean up viruses.

What, don't you trust me? (note: don't trust me.)

The point is, running something as root without knowing what it does is stupid. Unless it's a distro-specific GUI tool that prompts for your passwd before it starts, you should always man [command] before you run something as root.

no, I only trust drag and bersl and maybe weaver
give me time and i'll add you to my buddy list.