LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
Home Forums Tutorials Articles Register
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Networking
User Name
Password
Linux - Networking This forum is for any issue related to networks or networking.
Routing, network cards, OSI, etc. Anything is fair game.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 03-11-2007, 06:16 AM   #1
roopunix
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Kathmandu
Distribution: Redhat/fedora/Suse [Wanna Drive With Debian]
Posts: 208

Rep: Reputation: 30
Is antivirus Needed??


I am running a small webserver.This server is also acting as a internet gateway for my lan users through NAT.I have disbled unwanted services.At this point does any one think i need a antivirus or spam filter for the server.The users in my lan are lased with antivirus system.I am worried only for the linux server(Fedora core5).
Thanx
 
Old 03-11-2007, 06:45 AM   #2
dannystaple
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Location: London, Uk
Distribution: Ubuntu on Desktop
Posts: 121

Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by roopunix
I am running a small webserver.This server is also acting as a internet gateway for my lan users through NAT.I have disbled unwanted services.At this point does any one think i need a antivirus or spam filter for the server.The users in my lan are lased with antivirus system.I am worried only for the linux server(Fedora core5).
Thanx
Yes, I would probably run one antivirus system as complacency is generally inexcusable. ClamAV is pretty simple to get going on.
You will want a firewall running on it, and also a system to prevent brute force ssh attacks, like denyhosts or libpam-abl.
If you are running an MTA (mail server) I would also consider spamassassin as an antispam measure.
 
Old 03-11-2007, 10:28 AM   #3
JimBass
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: New York City
Distribution: Debian Sid 2.6.32
Posts: 2,100

Rep: Reputation: 49
I disagree. Since viruses that infect linux systems are so extremely rare, and only "infect" if they are run as root, there is no need to run anti-virus on a linux machine with 2 notable exceptions -

1) You run a mail server
2) You run a file server

The reasoning there is that any machine that hosts data that will be put on windows machines (like mail and files), should scan that data to be sure it is virus free. Protecting the linux box itself from a virus is a waste of processing to me. This however assumes several other things -

1) You have the server behind some (preferably hardware) firewall, although IPtables does a very good job too
2) You use the chkrootkit or other programs to make sure you don't have a known rootkit on your machine
3) You don't keep bad habits from windows, specifically you don't ever browse the internet as root.

If you do all of that, you won't ever see a virus on your linux box.

By the way, this is in no way a networking question. Please see this sticky from the top of the page: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...d.php?t=531122
I'm going to suggest it be moved to the security forum, or linux software, as that is a better place for its discussion (and if you search, you'll see it has been discussed thousands of times).

Peace,
JimBass
 
Old 03-11-2007, 12:46 PM   #4
dannystaple
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Location: London, Uk
Distribution: Ubuntu on Desktop
Posts: 121

Rep: Reputation: 15
Jim,

Generally I would agree with you, but there is little harm in scheduling a late night cron job that runs to eliminate the remote possibility. Linux is extremely resilient to viruses, especially when making sure that you do not browse, or run files from unknown sources as root, but it is still not impossible that something will get past defences.

I certainly agree that it was in the wrong area.

Danny
 
Old 03-11-2007, 01:18 PM   #5
evildarknight
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Location: Paradise Mauritius
Distribution: Debian lenny, Jlime,Delilinux
Posts: 57

Rep: Reputation: 15
you should update the system with security updates as often as possible to remove any particular bugs (vulnerabilities in net software) that these few viruses may exploit.
there are scripts on the web that may not be able to completely halt a unix or linux pc but they can fill some folders/partitions (eg /tmp, /home) with bogus data thus reducing the disk capacity.
 
Old 03-11-2007, 01:41 PM   #6
JimBass
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: New York City
Distribution: Debian Sid 2.6.32
Posts: 2,100

Rep: Reputation: 49
I understand what you're saying dannystaple, I still however respectfully disagree. Unlike the windows anti-virus scanners, clamav (which is on every mail server I run) has to be called to run on a given file. This works beautifully in the case of mail, as the scan is done, a positive results moves the message to the trash, and a negative result passes it to spamassassin. You would have to create a similiar utility to pass everything you download through clamav to check your user files. While that isn't difficult, it would take a bit of scripting, and for what? Unlike your modern win-anti-virus products, it doesn't "actively" protect you, by blocking the use of a virus infected file. When it runs a scan, it will just let you know that you have a virus. So being reactive as opposed to proactive makes it far less desirable to me. Once your nightly scan is run, a virus could have delivered its payload to your machine. Fortunately not being root has limited the damage it can do to /home/you and /tmp.

Sure the amount of work it takes to do the updates and scans is trivial compared to the power of processors now, I just don't see it doing much of anything. There are linux viruses, they do exist, and will probably continue to exist. I am not of the school that linux is immune to viruses. I do know that all of the win-anti-virus guys have been trying to find/develop a linux capable virus for years, largely in hopes that the linux-anti-virus software they write will begin to sell. Nothing works that they have done, except when run (even accidentally) as root. Truth be told, if windows users didn't run as administrator all the time, you would see a drastic drop in the number of infections there as well.

Peace,
JimBass
 
Old 03-11-2007, 08:29 PM   #7
vargadanis
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2006
Posts: 248

Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
The reasoning there is that any machine that hosts data that will be put on windows machines (like mail and files), should scan that data to be sure it is virus free. Protecting the linux box itself from a virus is a waste of processing to me.
I completely agree with Jim. (^_^)
 
Old 03-12-2007, 01:52 AM   #8
roopunix
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Kathmandu
Distribution: Redhat/fedora/Suse [Wanna Drive With Debian]
Posts: 208

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Thanx for your input guys.I am feeling good now..:-)
 
  


Reply



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
Antivirus for Lunix similar Norton Antivirus for Windows Chivozertsev Linux - Software 3 02-22-2022 04:40 PM
Antivirus survey: Do you run an antivirus program on linux? atom Linux - General 29 09-03-2009 03:22 PM
LXer: Note to new Linux users: No antivirus needed LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 02-26-2007 06:31 PM
AntiVirus clos21 Linux - Software 5 01-14-2005 03:59 PM
Which is best for Antivirus? Corrado Linux - General 1 09-10-2004 11:18 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Networking

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:15 AM.

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