[NTLUG:Discuss] Linux AntiVirus

[kbrannen@gte.net]

terry wrote:
> Thomas Cameron wrote:
> 
>>> Ralph Miller wrote:
>>>
...
>>> But seriously...
>>>
>>> There aren't any Linux viruses - so there isn't really a
>>> need to defend against them.
>>
>> Not technically true - http://librenix.com/?inode=21
>>
...
>     As to the question of a Virus or Worm causing problems on a Linux
> system, while it's theoretically possible to make a linux virus, in
> practice, you will never see one. Part of the problem is most people
> don't even know what a virus is, but I will spare y'all the boring
> details. This is the best accounting of virus's I came across:
> 
>             Linux     Windows
> Viruses     30     70,000
> Worms           70     100,000
> Trojans     130     300,000
> (Trogans: hard to restrict because a trojan could be defined as any
> executable which does something you don't want it to.)
> 
> Of course, the linux virus's were mostly lab creations which never
> entered the "wild". (quoted from previous post here, on DFWLUG:Discuss)

I'll agree with "linux virus's were mostly lab creations".  If you believe the 
link above, there have been 2 linux viruses, pretty lame ones too.

Where do the above stats come from?  I mean really, 30 viruses for linux?  I 
really find that hard to believe.  I've been working with Linux for 10 years, 
why haven't I heard about even 1 of them before now?  And I know there are a 
LOT of viruses for the Winders people, but 70K?  I wonder how many of those 
are the same ones with a different name.  FWIW, I'm not sure I trust the stats 
from the anti-virus companies; afterall, they survive on fear-mongering.

Not sure I believe the linux worm or trojan numbers being that high either, 
but I have an easier time believing there are some of those around.  There's a 
pretty nasty hole or two in PHP, or some I've been reading about on the 
security lists.

I wonder if they put "remote cracks" in those numbers.  I'd hope not; that 
should be category/row 4.

Kevin