Linux - GeneralThis Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Distribution: Lots of distros in the past, now Linux Mint
Posts: 748
Rep:
It doesn't hurt. Like anything, it depends on your needs. If you don't mind risking your system, don't bother with antivirus software. Then again, if you're like most people (cautious, but not paranoid) the extra effort is worth it. Clamav is a decent item, in this regard. (That is, when it doesn't trip on the GPL.)
For instance, out of the 14 servers I manage, I have two that are wide-open to the internet. One that is a multi-chrooted box with varying levels of security--it's funny to see how often a script-kiddie will try to "compromises" a system, completely oblivious to the possibility that someone might actually be observing them. The other is an "oops" box that's independent of the main network that I personally use to guage vulnerabilities.
While I'll never post a "challenge" for an attack (as some twit posted on LQ earlier), neither will I completely trust an important system to hold it's own against the creative minds out there. So, for the systems that pay my grocery bill, they all have antivirus and several levels of security insurance on them.
All in all, I'd say it's not entirely necessary to have an AV for Linux (yet), but against an active attacker, it's not a bad idea to protect yourself as best as you can. You know, the whole common sense thing, like the reason you don't get out of your car and leave the keys in the ignition all night.
Basically, it's not that much effort to use an open source AV, so why not?
* If you don't mind risking your system, don't bother with antivirus software. Then again, if you're like most people (cautious, but not paranoid) the extra effort is worth it.
* All in all, I'd say it's not entirely necessary to have an AV for Linux (yet), but against an active attacker, it's not a bad idea to protect yourself as best as you can.
If you're cautious and value your systems you should properly harden it.
Hardening starts by taking away chances (by removing vulnerable and unnecessary parts of the system), controlling access to the remaining parts of the system (restricting system capabilities, users, processes and service access) and making the system more, better auditable in general.
Antivirus software will not protect a system against crackers nor will it stop a cracker.
Actually I agree that even though now an antivirus is not need, we might need one in the future. Especially if linux goes mainstream and draws more users. But as I have mentioned, it's pretty useless for now.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.