So, why is it that Resnet says Linux is not susceptable to viruses?
http://www.ncsu.edu/resnet/viruses/#linux

yet, i can still buy software such as http://www.avast.com/eng/avast-for-linux-workstation.html

Is avast hoping we are idiots or is resnet dumb?

7/28/2006 11:11:31 AM

Saying Linux is not susceptible to viruses is inaccurate. There really are no viruses today that target linux, but that's not because linux is necessarily virus-proof. It has more to do with the fact that those who write viruses want to infect the largest number of machines possible, and since Windows has the largest market share, that's what these coders write viruses for.

7/28/2006 11:14:33 AM

and i would think ResNet knew that...

7/28/2006 11:16:56 AM

No one is safe: http://mastdb3.mcafee.com/VirusMap3.asp

7/28/2006 11:17:36 AM

It also has to do with the way Linux is built. You have to have root access to write to any system folders/files unless where in Windows all the system files are simply hidden and you still have root access to them all the time. I was reading on ZDNet about how Vista is supposed to have some feature that randomly shift key system files around to try and fool viruses/spyware.

7/28/2006 12:00:40 PM

you have no idea how many incoming freshmen think they're being cool by trying out linux, use a weak password, and leave all sorts of insecure daemons running. I would say that an insecure linux machine has the potential to do far more damage than an insecure windows machine

7/28/2006 12:44:33 PM

Quote :

" Linux, and other UNIX-like operating systems are not as susceptable to viruses"

is not the same as saying

Quote :

"Linux is not susceptable to viruses"

Well since they're not saying that Linux is not susceptable to viruses, I don't know what you're problem is. It's true to say linux is not AS susceptable both because of the nature of the OS and it's low number of users.

[Edited on July 28, 2006 at 4:30 PM. Reason : ]

7/28/2006 4:28:13 PM