Do any of you use antivirus software?

[mrtaber]

I note that there are several free (for personal use) antivirus software packages out there for Linux (BitDefender comes to mind). On my Windows machines at work we're armed to the teeth, and to a much lesser extent on our OS X servers. So is antivirus software a good precautionary measure on Linux, or overkill at this point?

Thanks,
Mark Taber :)

[whitehat]

Personally, I've never used anti virus software while on linux. I feel much more secure and protected in linux than I ever did in windows so I don't spend the time to run anti virus software. I'd say it comes down to how much you feel at risk.

[mrtaber]

I feel much the same way...very safe and secure. I do have a firewall up and running (Firestarter), but other than that...pfft! :) (For now, anyway)

Mark Taber

[imdeemvp]

Not me....just in windoz! :D

[RedFedora]

What's anti-virus software?
lol

[Shadow Skill]

Well its good if you don't want to spread winblows virii to other windows machines while you are running Linux, but it is not very important for Linux itself. Reading about some new IE flaws, and all I feel is the great urge to simply uninstall IE and be truly free of the IE exploits that alternative browsers can only partially protect against.

[StephenH]

Contrary to other replies posted, I did download and install F-Protect. I set it up in a cron job to update itself and run automatically. Periodically, I check the root mail to see that it hasn't found anything except the eicar test file. I am not so much afraid of catching one of the Windows virii on FC3 as in getting one attached to e-mail and copying something over to my laptop or my wife's system, both of which run a version of Windows (XP Home and 95 osr2 respectively).

A little paranoia can be a good thing. :)

[Shadow Skill]

Eh I just let the windows virii scanners deal with it...:) Good practice though.

[SpiderMan84]

I agree with StephenH. Just brcause Linux is by defalt more secure than Windowz dosn't mean you can let your guard down. Remember the Source Code is in the open. I prefer it that way but don't think people don't study it to find a flaw.

Anyway, I recently set up my Fedora 2 system and havn't configured a Anti-Virus program yet but intend to. I have become quite pleased with Avast (avast.com) wich I have used on windowz. They offer a free account to home users and have proven to be quite effective. the program will even do a Boot Scan before you boot your OS. they have a version for Linux wich I have downloaded but I have a feeling it is only a time trial requiring a registration. still if it's anything like the Windowz version I might concider buying it.

[the_profiler]

oh.. buying it? hmm.. well.. i haven't STFW yet.. but are there cases of virus-infected MACs? if not.. better have it than linux.. or especially.. wind0ze.. :cool:

[bob]

I use F-prot for Linux (it's never found a problem) and Avast for Windows. SpiderMan, the Avast linux beta is aimed at servers, which will be charged based on the number of machines involved. However, once out of beta, Avast will have a free home version (per Vlk - moderator - forum).

Personal opinion - if anyone hasn't tried Avast on a Windows machine, give it a couple of months trial - I doubt you'll ever pay for AV again.

[tomjmalone]

anti- what? ;-)

[backroger]

I note that there are several free (for personal use) antivirus software packages out there for Linux (BitDefender comes to mind). On my Windows machines at work we're armed to the teeth, and to a much lesser extent on our OS X servers. So is antivirus software a good precautionary measure on Linux, or overkill at this point?

Thanks,
Mark Taber :)

Well I use Anti-Virus since this is a mandatory part of our security to secure all possible treat. Linux is a very good os, plus you have a good firewall....never the less it is much better to have an Anti-virus in any type of OS more over if your working in a Company or Corporate type business.

Just remember "an ounce of prevention is better than the cure" ;)

[ogie@localhost ogie]$ uvscan --version
Virus Scan for Linux v4.32.0
Copyright (c) 1992-2004 Networks Associates Technology Inc. All rights reserved.(408) 988-3832 LICENSED COPY - Nov 27 2003

Scan engine v4.4.00 for Linux.
Virus data file v4419 created Jan 12 2005
Scanning for 112793 viruses, trojans and variants.

[ogie@locahost ogie]$

[james_in_denver]

Yes, I use F-Secure......every time I boot my Windows partition.

[Jman]

Clamav (http://dag.wieers.com/packages/clamav/) sometimes for me.

[Varkk]

I use F-prot for Linux (it's never found a problem) and Avast for Windows. SpiderMan, the Avast linux beta is aimed at servers, which will be charged based on the number of machines involved. However, once out of beta, Avast will have a free home version (per Vlk - moderator - forum).

Personal opinion - if anyone hasn't tried Avast on a Windows machine, give it a couple of months trial - I doubt you'll ever pay for AV again.



I also use f-prot for linux on my machine. I have never found a virus on my on machine but once with my laptop at a friends house I mounted and scanned his shared windows directories (I was bored) and found a trojan hiding in a zip file in his downloads directory. He was rather surprised as his windows based anti-virus had missed it.

[batuffolo]

avg also do a good free windows anti virus (picked up a number which norton missed on my win2k box) and they also do a linuxversion. you could try to email them and ask why they think you may need one! http://www.grisoft.com/us/us_index.php (let me know what they say!)

[LinuxHippy]

On my home pcs that are running Linux, I don't use an antivirus (firewall is up, though). I never had a problem with viruses on Linux. My pcs are 5 & 6 years old-they are as fast on the internet with DSL as brand new P4s at work running Windose XP Professional on the LAN with Norton AV. I'm pretty sure that anti-virus software slows you down.....on Linux you don't need anti-virus for a home pc....unless your networked to Windows pcs.

[Jman]

I'm a little worried that all this lack of concern about viruses will cause the first real Linux virus to hit hard. Fortunately there hasn't been a real threat yet.

[the_profiler]

I'm a little worried that all this lack of concern about viruses will cause the first real Linux virus to hit hard. Fortunately there hasn't been a real threat yet.
can you post maybe..a minor threat? i haven't STFW yet since im lacking time.. :(

[Varkk]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1123827.stm
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/linux.slapper.worm.html
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/linux.simile.html

[PeTzZz]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1123827.stm
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/linux.slapper.worm.html
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/linux.simile.html
"Because the code is open, there's no place for security breaches to hide."
May it become a serious issue?
:rolleyes:

[the_profiler]

nice research.. wait.. those are the most recent viruses/virii known to had infected the community? if it is.. isn't it cool? And i guess, it is really hard to infect/damage Linux since we build the systems on our own architecture/design.. :cool:

[PeTzZz]

if it is.. isn't it cool?
I don't think so. :rolleyes:

[Varkk]

nice research.. wait.. those are the most recent viruses/virii known to had infected the community? if it is.. isn't it cool? And i guess, it is really hard to infect/damage Linux since we build the systems on our own architecture/design.. :cool:

Those ae just the first three results from a google search for 'linux virus' or something similar

[taylor65]

For those running anti-virus software on linux, please keep in mind that the linux kernel is protected under the GPL (GNU Public License), and as such, no software that uses the linux kernel may charge money for purchase or use. Support can be charged however. The only way software that uses the linux kernel can be priced is if it makes enough changes to the kernel that it has effectively written a new kernel (the exact requirements are in the GPL). Bottom line, if you're using a software package for linux, and that software doesn't make any changes to the kernel, then you can't be charged for that software. Keep that in mind if one of these anti-virus companies try to make you pay for virus protection. Open source is proving to be a great thing - let's not let the practices and fears of the proprietary software world enter into the open source world.

[the_profiler]

Those ae just the first three results from a google search for 'linux virus' or something similar
oh i see.. sorry.. 'coz i had just assumed those results to be the recent since they were the first 3 results on Google.. definitely.. need more time to read.. ;)

[Petrohead]

For those running anti-virus software on linux, please keep in mind that the linux kernel is protected under the GPL (GNU Public License), and as such, no software that uses the linux kernel may charge money for purchase or use. Support can be charged however. The only way software that uses the linux kernel can be priced is if it makes enough changes to the kernel that it has effectively written a new kernel (the exact requirements are in the GPL). Bottom line, if you're using a software package for linux, and that software doesn't make any changes to the kernel, then you can't be charged for that software. Keep that in mind if one of these anti-virus companies try to make you pay for virus protection. Open source is proving to be a great thing - let's not let the practices and fears of the proprietary software world enter into the open source world.

I don't know where you came up with that. Follow this link to the actual GNU philosophy on software and how much you may charge for it. You'll find that in a free market place you can charge as much as you'd like. Freedom is the issue, the whole issue, and the only issue. Charge as much as your market will bear !

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html

Think about it. Why would someone develop a piece of anti-virus software and continue to develop that piece and the constantly changing definition files and provide those updates to you for free ? That'll go for any other piece of software developed and used in Linux. Cross-Over Office etc ............

[the_profiler]

nice idea.. i was also planning on mentioning the site.. :p

[taylor65]

The main point at the gnu.org site url you listed is that nobody has to pay for software protected under the GPL - it's perfectly ok for one person to pay for the software and then distribute it to everyone else in the world free of charge. Hence, you do not need to pay for software that is licensed under the GPL. As for "why would anyone update anti-virus software if they couldn't make money", well, you're absolutely right, nobody would. That's why there's no turbotax for linux.