Anti-virus for Ubuntu

hpuse

Blame it on MS engineers who kept on extending the same windows OS kernel and winsock APIs for the last 10-12 years on all their flavors of Operating systems. This fueled the whole virus market targeting windows machines. More with ease, flash and pdf content makers at Adobe paved way to the new wold of new generation malaware via browser, especially Internet Explorer.

The only positive side to it we have companies like Mcafee and Symantec becoming a million dollar enterprises, writing even crappier anti-virus software !!

Yes, this is called growth of technology capitalism growth :-)

tombruton87

there both fair comment masonn, It really is upto everybody to stop the spread of virus's just like bioloigical ones to make sure the infection rate is lower.

There are also alot of virus's/worms that target apache and other services, on linux and unix systems.

I read ur profile afterwards and saw your an oracle guy. Are you an owasp member?

Mr_Toad

tombruton87 wrote: »

there both fair comment masonn, It really is upto everybody to stop the spread of virus's just like bioloigical ones to make sure the infection rate is lower.

There are also alot of virus's/worms that target apache and other services, on linux and unix systems.

I read ur profile afterwards and saw your an oracle guy. Are you an owasp member?

No but some of the servers I work on are run by people who take security and other threats very seriously and the paranoia rubs off.

tombruton87

yea loads of the owasp guys are database guys as now database guys also have to be web guys and a million other jobs.

so many companies big and small just dont put enough effort into security

RobertoMoir

tombruton87 wrote: »

VIRUS is actually an acronym.

No, it isn't. Someone may have made a backronym out of it, but as used in the computer security field, "Virus" is not an acronym. It was a term (as applied to IT anyway) coined in or around Fred Cohen's classic paper on self-reproducing programs.

fwor

RobertoMoir wrote: »

No, it isn't. Someone may have made a backronym out of it

Backronym - nice word!

If you look at the subsequently concocted acronym it's hard to see why anyone bothered. It's so pathetic I'm not going to repeat it here.

tombruton87

you are indeed correct it was made into one when brain hit. As at this time a better definition of a computer virus was created

RobertoMoir

tombruton87 wrote: »

you are indeed correct it was made into one when brain hit. As at this time a better definition of a computer virus was created

[citation needed]

I've done work and research in the computer virus industry in my past, and I started a very long time ago; the very first time I heard of "Virus" being an acronym was in your post. I respectfully suggest someone has taken you for a ride on that one.

tombruton87

robertomoir are you a crest or a tiger guy? what institute did you do your research for Ive got my first paper released soon. All about mitb

fwor

tombruton87: believe it or not even academics get it wrong occasionally, and this is one of those occasions.

I worked in the computer and communications security industry for more than a decade and I have never see it written VIRUS or V.I.R.U.S., nor referred to as an acronym.

There's a good reason why: the analogy between a biological virus and a computer virus is so good, you don't need a ridiculously contrived acronym to make it any better.

[Incidentally, MITB ~is~ an acronym, and so by convention is written as MITB, not mitb.]