realtime anti virus program for linux
 

Hi.

This might be a very stupid questions, but I'm wondering if anyone can tell me if there are any antivirus software for Linux?

I know that it normally is not something that is needed, but in the company where I work they have a policy saying that every OS must have a realtime anti virus program installed on the pc's with automatic updates.

can anyone help me out here?

\mr_andersen.

Maybe clamav?.. You already searched the web? There's probably lots of AV that's compatible with Linux. Also try searching in freshmeat.net and sf.net...

Clamav is the leading open source antivirus. But it doesn't run as a real-time process protecting the system. It is mostly used as a filter of e-mail or network shared drives. Basically to protect windows users using services of a linux server.

So CLAMAV is only for windows? Viruses are rarely made for Linux though since many versions of binaries are made in it.

With just a quick Google search, I found:

kaspersky Anti-Virus for Linux http://www.kaspersky.co.uk/anti-virus_linux_workstation


and an old howto for Avast for Linux, http://www.howtoforge.com/virus-prot...u-gutsy-gibbon


Although it seems a lot of antivirus apps for Linux are mostly for server applications. Also of course it's mostly about protecting Windows on the same network.

Typical mindless company policy...

F-Prot has a Linux version as well. It is in the Gentoo portage, so I guess many other distro package repositories will include it too.

Mons

Norton/Symantec has one too.

Symantec AntiVirus for Linux
http://www.symantec.com/business/sec....jsp?gid=savce

Thanks for all the repleys.

I've just tried f-prot and it seemed ok and easy to use.

\mr_andersen.

What exactly does that mean? For example, does it accomplish what you want to do, or is it just easy to use and leaves you with a warm fuzzy feeling of having done something?

I agree completely. Neither "ease of use" or "seems ok" are objective indicators for quality. Only test-driving products comparing AV engine and signature quality, performance, support, update scheduling (and pricing) should matter. Regardless of necessity for AV on GNU/Linux, ClamAV may be OSS but compared (http://www.linuxquestions.org/blog/u...d-f-prot-2078/) to other AV offerings it may lack some in terms of detection and speed. BTW if you need real-time caps you'll prolly want Dazuko(.org).

If you stick to your distro' repository, and other wise a sensible use of the system, the chance of getting a virus on a Linux box is tiny anyway. The quality of the Linux anti-virus I would say is almost irrelvant as longs as it satisfy this mindless company policy.

Mons

The OP already said he knows it's normally not something that's needed and I also said "Regardless of necessity for AV on GNU/Linux"...


That's like saying that if you want 400 BHP you could buy 8 Zastava's instead of a Countach. Of course in the end it's a business decision but I'd rather use something qualitatively good over whatever heap of bad stuff.


Company policies tend to be hard for people to understand but they're there for a reason. (That's why some only evaluate it after it has failed to mitigate some breach of security.) Since GNU/Linux-based AV can also protect the weaker brethren I wouldn't call it "mindless" unless I'd knew more about this specific one.

The point was that the level of virus threat on a Linux system is very small. Given this, F-prot is more than adequate assuming there are other measures in place, like a firewall etc.
I think you are also giving typical company policies too much credit. Of course the OP must consider the specifics of his situation.

Mons

You didn't notice that point was mooted before you even made it?


No, I'm saying that calling their specific policies "mindless" seems unfounded unless you know the details. Do you by any chance?