LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 09-28-2007, 10:24 AM   #1
utkarshrawat
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2007
Posts: 120

Rep: Reputation: 15
WHY LINUX is Virus FREE


hi can any one tell me why Linux is virus as compare to windows
 
Old 09-28-2007, 10:28 AM   #2
GrapefruiTgirl
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Dec 2006
Location: underground
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 7,594

Rep: Reputation: 553Reputation: 553Reputation: 553Reputation: 553Reputation: 553Reputation: 553
Do a search on LQ here, for a query of words like 'linux virus' and you will quickly find MANY threads on the subject.
 
Old 09-28-2007, 12:43 PM   #3
perry
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: USA & Canada
Distribution: Slackware 12.0
Posts: 978

Rep: Reputation: 30
while it's possible for a virus to appear on Linux the chances of Linux getting hit with the virus of the day is minimal. it's really a numbers game. Windows still occupies over 90% of Internet users, hence there will be a 90% probability that a new virus will be written on a Windows platform, for a Windows platform. Moreover, Linux is open source whereas Windows is closed source. Such that when there is a problem, it's a lot easier for Linux people to fight over who gets to fix the problem first whereas with Windows, users have to either depend on the latest Windows update or hope that one of the mainstream virus detection companies can come up with a solution fast.

viruses are really glitches in the system. glitches that can get triggered intentionally. here's a perfect example. today it was announced that:
Quote:
Microsoft Excel Fails Math Test
Email this Story

Sep 28, 12:11 PM (ET)

SEATTLE (AP) - Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) (MSFT)'s Excel 2007 spreadsheet program is going to have to relearn part of its multiplication table.

In a blog post, Microsoft employee David Gainer said that when computer users tried to get Excel 2007 to multiply some pairs of numbers and the result was 65,535, Excel would incorrectly display 100,000 as the answer.

Gainer said Excel makes mistakes multiplying 77.1 by 850, 10.2 by 6,425 and 20.4 by 3,212.5, but the program appears to be able to handle 16,383.75 times 4.

"Further testing showed a similar phenomenon with 65,536 as well," Gainer wrote Tuesday.

He said Excel was actually performing the calculations correctly, but when it comes time to show the answer on the screen, it messes up.

Gainer said the bug is limited to six numbers from 65,534.99999999995 to 65,535, and six numbers from 65,535.99999999995 to 65,536, and that Microsoft is working hard to fix the problem.
Now, had not this announcement been made, all hands would be claiming that Excel has a virus... is really the same thing!

- Perry

Last edited by perry; 09-28-2007 at 12:47 PM.
 
Old 09-28-2007, 01:18 PM   #4
coolb
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Distribution: Gentoo 2006.1(2.6.17-gentoo-r7)
Posts: 222

Rep: Reputation: 30
no, why affect a gnu/linux system when you can infect a windows system twice as fast?

Last edited by coolb; 09-28-2007 at 01:19 PM. Reason: spelling
 
Old 09-28-2007, 02:56 PM   #5
rshaw
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Perry, Iowa
Distribution: Mepis , Debian
Posts: 2,692

Rep: Reputation: 45
it is _not_ a numbers game.

if that were the case, apache on linux would be getting attacked much more than microsoft.

it's a better design game.

clear dividing line between user and admin:

all pre-xp desktops ran as a root equivalent, giving every tom,dick, and harry easy access to system internals. even xp's admin user is a joke as it's a bolt on after thought and can be gotten around easily (i'm told).

linux has a three tiered permission structure and doesn't auto execute things based on extension:

.bat, .com, .exe, etc.

no registry:

feared by users lest they break something, treated as a playground by malware writers.

activeX/I.E :

browser _not_ a integral part of the file management system.


looking at it from the outside, if you were actually _trying_ to design an insecure system(for whatever reason), you would do all of the above.
 
Old 09-28-2007, 03:37 PM   #6
frenchn00b
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2007
Location: E.U., Mountains :-)
Distribution: Debian, Etch, the greatest
Posts: 2,546

Rep: Reputation: 57
Because the hardware support is crap and most people like things that just work !
then they do not install linux, and gain experience in hacking and ... spend time with windows or mac
 
Old 09-28-2007, 08:07 PM   #7
Dragineez
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: Annapolis
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 278

Rep: Reputation: 41
Amen

Quote:
Originally Posted by rshaw View Post
it is _not_ a numbers game.

if that were the case, apache on linux would be getting attacked much more than microsoft.

it's a better design game.
Windows people are always fond of saying "Well, we're a bigger target." BS! That has little or nothing to do with it. All of our code is open source! If a cracker wanted to pick the easiest target, wouldn't it be the one he had the source code for?

Guess not. That whole "We're the biggest target, so of course we get attacked more." argument is wrong. Privilege escalation is just much harder to do on a properly secured operating system.
 
Old 09-29-2007, 03:11 PM   #8
jiml8
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,171

Rep: Reputation: 116Reputation: 116
Also, shouldn't forget that Windows is a monoculture: IE and Outlook Express are found on almost all Windows systems. Thus, a virus written for an IE/OE architecture finds fertile grounds.

Compare that to the situation with Linux or any other *nix. Choices, choices, choices. Everyone's architecture is at least somewhat different. This makes the invasion/infection/propagation problem MUCH harder.
 
Old 10-01-2007, 11:47 PM   #9
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 9,078
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 3182Reputation: 3182Reputation: 3182Reputation: 3182Reputation: 3182Reputation: 3182Reputation: 3182Reputation: 3182Reputation: 3182Reputation: 3182Reputation: 3182
You would be, I am afraid, hopelessly naiive (pardon me) to assume that any computer-system could be "virus free" for any reason that might be remotely-connected to its supplier.

Microsoft Windows garners a rather-unfair reputation for "vulnerability' just from the idea that every user is an all-powerful "Administrator."

Any program that finds itself executing on a particular computer will find itself executing "in the context of a particular 'user'" and therefore "able to do what 'this user' can do." This is just as true for Linux as it is for Windows. But herein lies one very-important difference...

In the Linux, and OS/X, environments, a 'user' probably is not regarded by the system as being "all powerful." Whereas on the Windows system it probably is.
 
Old 10-02-2007, 11:46 AM   #10
jiml8
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,171

Rep: Reputation: 116Reputation: 116
Quote:
Microsoft Windows garners a rather-unfair reputation for "vulnerability' just from the idea that every user is an all-powerful "Administrator."
I do not agree that the reputation is unfair. Windows actively encourages users to run as administrators, and developers commonly develop user-level software that needs administrator privileges to run.

If Windows made it simple to run as an ordinary user, while opening an administrator session when required, and if Windows' default setup had users configured as ordinary users, and if the Windows security setup made it easy and convenient for developers to write code that properly implemented permissions, then yes the reputation would be unfair.

But as it is, people operate Windows systems as Administrators because Windows strongly encourages that behavior. So the reputation is certainly deserved.
 
Old 10-02-2007, 12:43 PM   #11
SlowCoder
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Southeast, U.S.A.
Distribution: Ubuntu, Mint
Posts: 939

Rep: Reputation: 38
It IS a numbers game, and it IS because of Windows' native lack of security infrastructure. These 2 reasons together make for one heck of a playground for crackers.

The percentage of Windows user who have any idea what they are doing, and can properly secure a Windows system, if FAR outweighed by users who can't do anything but type a resume, browse the web and turn the computer on and off. Windows, in its attempt to be as easy as possible to use, lets users work as administrators by default. Users must explicitly configure new non-admin accounts. But then most applications won't work in those accounts without security tweaking.

Linux, in contrast, started as a geekland system, and most people using Linux have a fair concept of security. Linux users are by default normal users, and must explicitly become root/admin to gain access to restricted areas.

I think it's looking good that Linux is beginning to pick up steam, and taking some percentage of the market from Windows. However, I also believe that if anyone in the development community attempts to make Linux less secure, they'll probably be shot on sight!
 
Old 10-03-2007, 11:16 AM   #12
kaz2100
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Location: Penguin land, with apple, no gates
Distribution: SlackWare > Debian testing woody(32) sarge etch lenny squeeze(+64) wheezy jessie stretch buster
Posts: 1,731

Rep: Reputation: 107Reputation: 107
One day in the history, most of the malicious programs were found in Apple/Macintosh (68030 age).
Another day in the history when information highway was emerging, entire UNIX network died, because somebody threw a warm into network.

Both of them learned. Somebody and many users did not.

Happy Penguins!
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
why linux is virus free sailu_mvn Linux - Security 8 03-14-2006 11:17 PM
AVG Anti-virus Free For Linux Now Available For Download furfurdemon666 Linux - News 34 03-12-2006 12:22 PM
Free Virus Program For Linux andre_bergh Linux - Security 4 03-24-2005 01:28 AM
how security is imlemented in linux i.e. how do we say that it is virus free vinaymudgil007 Linux - Security 10 09-27-2004 11:53 AM
Boot virus or Anti-Virus? AVG Free Anti-Virus Software problems SparceMatrix Linux - Security 9 08-02-2004 03:35 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:18 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration