Anti-virus for Ubuntu

MarkBargain

I have installed Ubuntu on a netbook. I wondered if anyone could recommend a free anti-virus product that is easy to use for Ubuntu? Do Ubuntu users generally use security software or run the risk as Linux is thought of as more secure than Windows? This netbook won't be used for anything overly sensitive, but still...

Dave_C_2

Basically you don't need anti virus for Linux.
More details here

Dave

Esqui

Linux is not particularly susceptible to viruses and malware. But if you want to be on the safe side, then Clam AV comes highly recommended by my boyfriend

ChristopheB

This link may prove useful.

MoneySavingUser

ChristopheB wrote: »

The link may prove useful.

Market Share Myth

Some people say that linux suffers less from malware because it has less than 1% of the desktop market compared to Windows 90% & suggest that if linux ever increases in popularity then it will suffer just as badly. This argument is deeply flawed & not just by the spurious statistics. Linux dominates server markets. Why struggle to write a virus that might knock out a few thousand desktops when knocking out a few thousand servers could knock out a continent? Yet it is the desktop machines that are commonly exploited.

Because desktop machines have less security and modern day virus makers want to steal peoples credit card details etc. than disrupt companies (yes companies store this data too but it is more likely to be encrypted and harder to get at)

tombruton87

it is extremely hard to write a traditional virus for linux. linux servers get attacked on a daily basis. Most attackers will exploit programs to gain access. However a fully patched system is very tuff to get into however fully patched system can't guarantee protection against some attacks.

Most people install software from known repos wen using linux so they know the source. Most hackers and internet nasty ppl use linux. the most popular choice atm seems to be backtrack. It has all the tools a lot of ppl will ever need. It is based on ubuntu.

It like osx is a multi user system. so there is always more than one user on the system. the all powerful root, unless the attacker has root access they probably cut install stuff.

but ur most likely using repos so you aint gina get a virus and most stuff on linux is open source so you know way it does. ubuntu gets patched much faster than windows and OSX. The last known security whole is 10.4 and as soon as that hits the internet it gets patched.

As a hacker you like ppl who don't know way there doing ppl that install linux generally know that a music file should not end in .exe, or recognise the difference between a popup and a real security announcement.

candtalan

tombruton87 wrote: »

it is extremely hard to write a traditional virus for linux

Err - I think this is slightly mis stated: it is easy to 'Write' a virus for a linux based OS, however it is very difficult indeed to use it to firstly infect someone else's a machine, and furthermore to pass on to other machines. So difficult in fact that afaik such viruses are not found in the wild, only in test labs. The file systems used in GNU/Linux OS's are littered with restrictive permissions. Many systems even have the admin level account actually disabled by default (eg Ubuntu), and the normal use of 'non-admin' levels is pretty well universal, and apps are almost entirely got from more or less guarded libraries.
But, if you personally decide to download and install a rogue app, and use your password, and if it contains malware, then well, you have just installed malware! And an antivirus program will not save you from that!
The built in firewall type restrictions of ip tables, and normal use of a router is good for denying acces to unwanted incoming attacks.

tombruton87

candtalan do you understand what makes a virus a virus and not another type of malware. How many virus's do you know of for linux that somebody has managed to write. I have only came across one. yes there are "virus's" that can attack applications but these are not technically virus's remember VIRUS is actually an acronym.


The name eludes me of the virus for linux but it was released open source and it actually tries to patch the kernel.

also your last bit about trusted sources just repeated what i said. just like a human virus for it to survive it must infect at an equal to or greater rate than which it dies and atm that just isn't a reality on linux

Mr_Toad

tombruton87 wrote: »

candtalan do you understand what makes a virus a virus and not another type of malware. How many virus's do you know of for linux that somebody has managed to write. I have only came across one. yes there are "virus's" that can attack applications but these are not technically virus's remember VIRUS is actually an acronym.


The name eludes me of the virus for linux but it was released open source and it actually tries to patch the kernel.

also your last bit about trusted sources just repeated what i said. just like a human virus for it to survive it must infect at an equal to or greater rate than which it dies and atm that just isn't a reality on linux

Linux Viruses:

• 42
• Arches
• Alaeda - Virus.Linux.Alaeda
• Badbunny
• Binom - Linux/Binom
• Brundle
• Bukowski
• Caveat
• Coin
• Diesel - Virus.Linux.Diesel.962
• Hasher
• Kagob a - Virus.Linux.Kagob.a
• Kagob b - Virus.Linux.Kagob.b
• Lacrimae (aka Crimea)

The above is from the Wiki page and doesn't include the Trojans or the long list of worms.

There are two main reasons most Linux users know little about them.

Their effectiveness is crippled by the lack of privileges when infected code is run and the fact that most people get their software from trusted repositories which are checked by the people who maintain them.

tombruton87

none of those virus's affect any ubuntu distros after 5.10. Im guessing the OP will be using one of the latest versions of ubuntu so they are irrelivent. Most of those virus's you have listed off a public wiki page are either not virus's or malware that sits on a linux server doing no damage and attacks ms machines when they connect to it and infect that machine doing damage. Or some are application level virus's that are mainly targeted at aphache

masonn do you work in the IT security field? As you are using a questionable source which in its slef uses questionable sources.

Mr_Toad

tombruton87 wrote: »

masonn do you work in the IT security field? As you are using a questionable source which in its slef uses questionable sources.

No I'm an Oracle DBA.

I picked that Wiki because it was the first hit on the page. My point was that even Linux users shouldn't stick their heads in the sand when it comes to viruses.

It's true that most people will never see a Linux virus and as long as they protect their root privileges they'll be fine but it worries me when people use words like irrelevant.

Most Linux users interact with other people, swapping files and emails with them. Many of those people, if not most, will be Windows users and I see no reason why we shouldn't scan files that pass through our systems for viruses. If not to protect our own system then at least to ensure we don't pass them on to people who might be at risk.