Red HatThis forum is for the discussion of Red Hat Linux.
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.
Linux is virus-free. I don't know how to get any more descriptive than that. There are "proof of concept" viruses, but none are effective unless you run as 'root' all the time and even then you usually have to manually invoke the virus to get things started. Personally I wouldn't even call that a virus - I think of a virus as being something like the flu - you don't have to do anything except get close to someone who's infected and you get the virus and there's nothing you can do about it.
There are two additional observations that I have made in this regard:
1) Linux is "open source" (or similar) -- the thing is, it would be more difficult to hide a piece of malicious code in a program that anyone (including potential employers) could read.
2) Microsoft and Apple seem to depend very highly on scanning for viruses, but are slow to patch the vulnerability. There appears to be a greater emphasis on patching and prevention, than waiting until an attack occurs in Linux.
Millions of eyes on the code can make a big difference. Are there are any experts out there that would like to correct or comment on this?
Millions of eyes on the code can make a big difference. Are there are any experts out there that would like to correct or comment on this?
The truth is that there usually aren't millions of eyes on the code; programmers are too busy to look at so much code so they only look at the tiny bit that they're interested in. I know almost 200 people who use Linux, and of that lot maybe as many as 5 ever bother to read any code. In the few projects I've sent patches in for, I haven't even bothered to look at the vast majority of the code - just the tiny bit which I wanted to fix. However, there usually is at least 1 other person who reviews the changes. The Linux kernel is one of the more unusual projects in the effort put in to review code and so on, so it would take some effort to get malicious code in there; however, not all projects run like that.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.