Re: [gentoo-user] Linux viruses

[the]

On 07/06/13 02:21, Dale wrote:
> William Kenworthy wrote:
>> On 06/07/13 04:12, Dale wrote:
>>> I had a interesting adventure the other day.  A friend of mine's son is
>>> getting ready to go to college.  Budget is tight so we went to find a
>>> used laptop for him.  I went into the local puter shop and the techie
>>> guy there had a interesting statement that makes me think I'm not
>>> recommending them for computer service to anyone else.  While we was
>>> chatting, he said that Linux is just as prone to getting a virus as
>>> windoze and so is a Mac.  I think my laughing let him know I wasn't
>>> buying his comment.
>>>
>>> I since did some googling and it seems I am right and he just thought I
>>> was some know nothing guy he could sell some service too.  Anyway, has
>>> anything changed to make Linux more prone to viruses than it used to
>>> be?  I read a percentage somewhere that said like 99% of viruses are
>>> windoze only.  Is there a indisputable source of information on this?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Dale
>>>
>>> :-)  :-)
>>>
>> food for thought - some years back a member of the local lug picked up
>> that something was listening on a port that he didn't think should be in
>> use.  Turned out to be an infected windows binary running under wine ...
>>
>> I presume he had been using wine and this was left running, rather than
>> self starting.
>>
>> BillK
>>
>>
>>
>
> Well, no Wine here.  So that won't happen.  Actually, I don't have a
> copy of windoze here at all.  Neither of my two rigs have ever had
> windoze installed on them at all.
>
> BTW, I have been known to open those attachments before. I usually open
> them with kwrite or something and try to see what is human readable in
> there.  Most is machine language but there is usually a small portion
> that is human readable.  They sent it and I'm nosy that way.  lol

Perhaps it's easier to use strings?


-- 
Stop talking and start compiling.
Linux user #557897