Is linux virus-safe or just ignored by hackers?

[Mr.Panda]

Windows has tons of viruses, spyware, malware, and other nasty things. When we try to point it out to people who use only Windows, we usually back linux up with the promise of much less virus related problems.

To which the Windows owner says... and your OS has like what 0.5% of the market?

So what's it really all about? Is linux and OSX virus free because of their design. Or is it just that mainstream hackers tend to focus on Windows because it is afterall the OS of choice for the majority.

[techieMoe]

This is a subject of much debate on both sides. There are arguments saying that UNIX-based operating systems are inherently more secure than Windows-based OSes. I'm sure someone has a link to an in-depth explanation of this. I just don't feel like writing it all out right now.

::EDIT:: Here's one link to chew on:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/securit...dows_vs_linux/

and one on OS X, but the UNIX arguments are applicable:

http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterpri...dows_inhe.html

[Zelmo]

I used to think it was more of the latter, but recently I'm starting to see things the other way. In April I saw this story linked from Slashdot, which was followed up the next day by this one. So viruses are being made for Linux, but to no apparent effect.

I also googled for linux virus after reading your post and the first few links that came up were pretty enlightening. They suggest that it's some of both, but more that Linux is just more virus-safe. What was interesting to note from one link is the idea that OpenOffice users often work on documents created in MS Office that may contain viruses. So the Linux system can store those viruses, and even though they don't do anything in Linux, they can be passed along when those documents are forwarded to Windows users. That's one argument for using AV software to protect your friends rather than yourself.

[CodeRoot]

So what's it really all about? Is linux and OSX virus free because of their design. Or is it just that mainstream hackers tend to focus on Windows because it is afterall the OS of choice for the majority.

Generally, crackers want to affect the greatest number of systems possible.

A system that requires less effort to crack makes it a more likely target.
A system that is more widely used makes it a more likely target.

Both of these factors "come into play"...

Windows is the best target with regard to both criteria.
Linux is not the best target with regard to either criteria.

Windows is currently much more widely used than Linux -- and Linux is much more secure by design than Windows.

[d38dm8nw81k1ng]

i agree, it's a bit of both. you've got a third factor: intelligence of users. no matter how many MCSEs try to defend them, the average windows user is an idiot. take my cousin: he downloads everything he sees. although on a side note i've given him a couple of ubuntu liveCDs for him to try (he wants to be cool, bless him).

[bigtomrodney]

I would never say Linux, or indeed any Unix is immune to viruses, but the argument about market share just irritates me. It seems to me to be a bit of a cop out answer. It seems to make sense when first encountered but the fact is with users not having write access to the system components, and files not being executable by default any infections would be solely the users fault. The user would really need to engage actively in trying to execute the virus.

On that note - anyone that doesn't have their /tmp on a seperate partition/disk to the root partition is instantly far more vulnerable to attack. Granted this would be moreof an inconvenience to all but production level servers, it certainly could allow an attacker to take a system down a lot quicker.

[fingal]

I'm not too hot on philosophy these days, but picking up on what bigtomrodney just said - the market share argument sounds like some sort of logical fallacy. Just because something doesn't have a large 'market share' ... does this make it inferior in some way?

Markets are strange things: a lot of people read a newspaper called 'The Sun' in this country. It only requires a reading age of between 11-12 years old, but it had (or still has?) more readers than any other paper. If the world was about to end there would still be a headline like: 'Roger the Randy Vicar in Perverted Wedding Day Romp!' Bingo and boobs - That's what you get from 'The Sun'.

If I'm more literate than that someone could say, 'Ahhh ha! But what you read is crap because it only has 5% of the market share!' One plus about a *nix system is the amount of password protection; but no-one would pretend that this is enough on its own, and there are plenty of free tools out there to help you tighten things up even more.

[gtmtnbiker98]

To chime in a bit, with Visat on the horizon, things will "hopefully" change with virus threats. Vista is slowly adopting what Linux has had since the beginning, lower level accounts for users and requring an "administrator/root" password for higher level access. However, on the same note, Windows Vista will not be useable until at least SP2.

[bigtomrodney]

Fingal:Angry


lol. The Sun is a terrible paper. Have you seen the Irish Sun? It's a joke. They put an irish related headline on the front page, and the rest of the paper is the UK release. Right down to pricing in sterling and advertisements for shops and products we don't even have here.

But back to the subject at hand, that's a very good point about market proportions. A good analogy.

[fingal]

Fingal:Angry


lol. The Sun is a terrible paper. Have you seen the Irish Sun? It's a joke. They put an irish related headline on the front page, and the rest of the paper is the UK release. Right down to pricing in sterling and advertisements for shops and products we don't even have here.

But back to the subject at hand, that's a very good point about market proportions. A good analogy.

Lol!! I am a bit miffed today for some reason. I haven't seen the Irish Sun in fact (sounds like the preamble to some God awful joke to me). I've read The Irish Times though: not sure if the same UK-centric thing applies there?

When you mentioned angry I thought of this for some reason.