Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 22:31:22 -0700
Reply-To: Jeffrey Schwaia <jeff@TSSGI.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Jeffrey Schwaia <jeff@TSSGI.COM>
Subject: Re: infected files, Linux gets more viruses?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0309252325090.25559-100000@maroon.cs.uchicago.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Take it off-line! Unless your Vanagon is operated Linux or Windows or CPM
it doesn't belong on this list. There's plenty of other places you guys can
evangelize about which OS is the best.
Geez, this is worse than a tire thread...
-----Original Message-----
From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com]On Behalf
Of Wesley Alden Pegden
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 9:51 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: infected files, Linux gets more viruses?
Okay, dude, I'll admit, I was overstepping with my "no viruses for linux"
line, but I think you'll have to agree that claiming linux is more
vunerable than linux is pure rubbish.
> http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2003Jun/gee20030605020295.htm
This is an interesting link. I would encourage you to read the comments
furthur down on the page. One person "expertly" points out that Mi2G
seems to be off in their addition and subtraction in some cases by 1,000's
of cases---seems highly dubious to me. Some comments on the slashdot page
were interesting as well. Need some more info on Mi2G? google mi2g and
check out the second link... In fact, check out most of the links.
They're almost all complaining of the company's incompetancy.
What about windows? Go to news.google.com . I read it all the time. And
I don't know if there's been a day this whole summer without a story about
the latest windows vulnerability or virus attack. And the number of times
I've seen a article about a linux attack there? "0". And of course, if
the operating systems were even close in security, you'd expect
the media to be hugely lopsided in favor of windows---the media goes with
the money, of course.
Anyways, the simple fact of the matter is that viruses aren't an issue
for linux. Period. While "0" was a little low on my part, "1" wouldn't
be to far off for the linux virus count. I would encourage you to check
out "The short life and hard times of a Linux virus" for a good
explanation as to why I, as a Linux user, never worry about viruses. It's
at http://libreniz.com/?inode=21
In any office or dorm or computer lab, viruses and "worms" are topics of
conversation. Why? Because people run Windows. I get these "worms" in
my inbox all the time, and shake my head as I think about the person who
ran an operating system silly enough to get infected by it.
With diligent patch-work, windows can be a liveable operating system,
though rarely for people who have spent any serious time with a good linux
box as their primary system. All too often, though, your diligence won't
matter: Microsoft is all too often behind the hackers, as the headlines
have all-too-often indicated in the past days.
I ran windows for years, with updated patches, and was the victim of many
viruses. I've run Linux now for a solid two years, without a single
attack. One time, I (very, very, foolishly) activated microsofts web
server to host a web page on my machine. Literally, within 3 minutes, my
computer was UNUSABLE, and the university had disconnected me from the
network to quarantine my computer and prevent spread of the worms that had
so quickly taken effect of the windows server's many vulnerabilities.
Under linux, I run web servers, ssh servers, and sometimes ftp servers.
How many attacks? 0.
I'm all for everybody getting more information, and understanding the
information they're getting. The study cited isn't even a study of
attacks on personal computers, and doesn't even claim to be comprehensive
or reliable (and explicitly warns that its sample size is to small). I'm
sticking to my guns with linux. I'll let you know if I have any breakins.
Sorry for getting longwinded, and I hope that I don't come off as arrogant
or offensive. My opinion isn't worth any more than anybody elses.
wes
'84 vanagon... woohoo!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Don Preston
> '87 Wolfy GL ASI
> ~Betsy the Mp3 Bus~
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Samuel L. Walters [mailto:samuel.walters@verizon.net]
> Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 9:32 AM
> To: Don Preston
>
> Don,
>
> I don't use Outlook for the very reason that so many try to attack it
> because they hate MS, but I do keep Norton AntiVirus loaded and have it
> updated daily. I also get all of the MS patches within a day or two of
> when they notify me of them.
>
> I think that since so many computer "experts" continuously state that
> Linux rarely if ever gets hit by viruses, that I want to ask you what is
> the source of your allegation about Linux and virus attacks - you didn't
> do any better in documentation of your assertion than the person you
> criticized.
>
> I don't mean that to sound hostile, but as a request for information,
> because I frequently think about setting up at least one computer with
> Linux. For a number of years, I regularly read computer magazines, but
> now don't very often so I could have missed obvious sources of this
> information. But this is the first time I have ever heard or read the
> assertion you make and I have heard and read the contrary dozens and
> dozens of times.
>
> But, I have no problem with gaining new information and changing a
> perception.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Sam
>
>
> --
> Samuel L. Walters
> Attorney at Law
> GIS and Demographic Consultant
> Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution
>
> 2636 N. Calvert St.
> Baltimore, MD 21218
>
> 410-235-3086 (voice/fax)
> 410-598-6068 (cell)
>
> All incoming and outgoing email scanned by
> regularly updated Norton AntiVirus.
>
|