On Tue, 27 Apr 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm curious about virii and Linux...
>
> Am I wrong to assume that Linux is not immune to virii (I don't even know if
> virii is a word - but it just sounds cool :) ?
Jay,
Linux is immune to most viruii :) that affect LOSE 95/8 because
most virii are specific to a particular kind of executable and
operating system, and depend on the total anarchy of the
environment.
However, if the virus infects a LOSE 95/8 OS that is resident on
the same system where Linux is resident, and eats the partition
table and boot sector, Linux cannot see the disk anymore, since
Linux depends on the boot sector to boot. Linux depends on the
partion table to know where to look on the disk for the data.
> Obviously the security features of Linux can prevent some
> virii from affecting certain files on your system... but what
> about the boot sector? And what if you happen to be su'd or
> logged in as root when you get (and heaven forbid) execute an
> infected program?
Yes, Linux also provides disk, file, and memory protections that
Lose 95 does not (I understand that OS/2 does provide these
protections, and I really don't know about NT.) Programs can only
affect files and other programs that have a specific set of
permissions.
I guess if the virus got in during boot, and functioned with root
permission, it could play heck with your system.
Is there a need for a virus scannner for Linux? I don't really
know but I suspect not.
> Is there a need for virus scanning software on Linux? My guess is Linux
> isn't a targe right now because of it's lack of market share - but as more
> users realize that Linux is better than Windows (imho), I would imagine that
> virus software will start appearing in our beloved OS as well.
I sure as heck hope this doesn't happen.
-- David
David Teague, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU/Linux Because software support should be free, timely,
useful, technically accurate, and friendly.
(Thanks guys!)
