1 |
Florian Philipp wrote: |
2 |
<snip> |
3 |
>> FWIW, AntiVir, Bitdefender, and F-Prot run quite well on Linux, and each |
4 |
>> has BOTH Linux and Windows Trojan and virus signatures. So you can |
5 |
>> install these and scan your windows box, and then scan your Linux |
6 |
>> box/downloads for malware (e.g. openoffice files, media files, etc.). |
7 |
>> |
8 |
>> Add Dazuko, and you can get real-time scanning of your Linux box while |
9 |
>> downloading/compiling software. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> This is getting OT but I still want to ask: |
12 |
> Is it really necessary to run an anti-virus on linux? I just want to |
13 |
> hear some opinions on that topic because I thought security fixes for |
14 |
> your software are the way to go for fighting virae on linux. |
15 |
|
16 |
Anti-Virus on Linux. No. |
17 |
(presuming that you don't run as root, and have lots of unprivileged |
18 |
users for individual applications.) |
19 |
|
20 |
Anti-Malware on Linux. Yes. |
21 |
(Malware gets to the box via spoofed or hacked software distribution or |
22 |
creation sites; bad links or poisoned DNS caches; or via (e.g.) browser |
23 |
memory attacks - at plugins or exploits) |
24 |
|
25 |
The oldtimers will tell you that safe hex and perhaps integrity |
26 |
monitoring (e.g. Samhain or tripwire) are all that's needed. But desktop |
27 |
Linux with Browsing, IM, etc. is changing that, IMHO. |
28 |
|
29 |
The three packages above have Linux Trojan and Rootkit signatures, as |
30 |
well as Windows malware sigs. Easy enough to run an occasional scan of |
31 |
the Linux box (or Windows partition); and to scan each Linux download |
32 |
before reading, compiling, or passing on. |
33 |
|
34 |
(Dazuko additionally allows realtime scans of compilation read/writes). |
35 |
|
36 |
IMHO, Linux and MAC are the next frontier for malware, and -SADLY- |
37 |
AntiMalware signature and heuristic techniques are one thing we can |
38 |
learn about from Windows :-( |
39 |
|
40 |
|
41 |
|
42 |
|
43 |
-- |
44 |
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |