Dear all, i was a bit curious as to whether i need to install an antivirus on my machine. If yes then whichone?

I have heard that an antivirus is not required. Any comments?

Security is a number of practices. All added together help protect your system. The more you use and the better you use those, the more likely your data will be secure.

1 members found this post helpful.

I don't use an antivirus on my linux machine.

What are you trying to do with your system?
Browsing?, running server (web)applications?

Do you have a good root password? ('12345' or 'password' is not good)

A computer is only as secure as its user :-).

1 members found this post helpful.

Greetings,
The answer really depends upon your use and acceptable level of risk.
If no data of value runs through the machine, and you do not mind having to reload the machine if it becomes compromised, then little protection is needed. The more you risk, the more protection I would recommend.

Successful virii (and other threats) that target Linux are rare, but do exist. More worrysome, there are multiple rootkits and access escalation vectors that are known, and (of course) there are likely to be vulnerabilities not yet discovered.

If you use CentOS as a desktop, you are most vulnerable but your risk may be smaller. I would do some hardening by closing services not needed, keeping up with the latest software, loading CLAMAV and running clamscan on occasion. If you run it as a server, I would add a rootkit detection. There is also value in running services that MAY expose it to aquisition in a container (chroot, LXC, or even OpenVZ). You will also find great value in regular unattended backups. At least back up your critical data and configuration information for fast recovery. (No detection or AV is perfect, backups may be your ONLY way forward someday!)

My personal preferred configuration for servers is to run the server as an isolated OpenVZ host that is unavailable to any but a certain local subnet. All critical servers are run as guests, firewalled, tripwired, and scanned for rootkits and virii from the host level where even a successful exploit cannot hide from detection. Backup and restore is also fast and easy, and I can recover entire servers, or migrate them to another host rapidly. This is overkill for most things, so I only use it where it makes good sense.

Let me emphasize this: your protection should be that level suitable for your risk. Only YOU can determine what the cost would be if the data on a machine were stolen or destroyed. I would apply at least the minimum appropriate level of protection considering the value of the data and use, and more protection for servers than for laptops or workstations. This laptop I am using has minimal AV and hardening because I reload it often. (This month Arch, last month VSIDO: I like to "play with things".)

1 members found this post helpful.

Many experienced Linux users do not use anti-virus, as there are no Linux viruses in the wild and have not been for years. In contrast, a firewall is essential. Note that Linux firewall is built into the kernel (it's called iptables) and most Linux "firewall programs" are actually frontends for configuring iptables. (I'm an exception--I do run an antivirus, but that's me being paranoid.)

Here's a good overview of security on Linux: http://www.howtogeek.com/135392/htg-...d-when-you-do/

1 members found this post helpful.

There are no Linux specific virus' but there are rootkits and also cross platform malware.
Linux anti-virus applications look for Windows virus', typically because Windows virus' can still travel through Linux systems (email, file transfer, etc) and infect Windows systems if passed on.
If you have a need to protect your system, not protect other peoples Windows systems, then looking at the actual threats to Linux systems and using tools to monitor for them and deal with them is the best thing to do. If you are an ordinary user then safe computing practises should be all you need to do.

1 members found this post helpful.

Hi,

I am sort of guessing that a system running Centos 6.2 has not been updated for a while (it should be Centos 6.5).

As above security is what you make of it. Have you been running this system long? If you don't update you don't get the latest security patches.

Have you upgraded bash since Shellshock. Did you start at 6.0 and gradually update to 6.2 or did you download this version (which I gather was late 2011) and not update? Let us know your goals and you can move forward.

Cheers

1 members found this post helpful.

CentOS is on 6.6 now I'd upgrade first AV second

1 members found this post helpful.

I've been using Linux since 1999 & have yet to have any problem that I didn't cause myself.
(I don't use AV software.)

1 members found this post helpful.