2005/11/26, John Summerfied <debian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > Rodolfo Alcazar wrote: > > On Fri, 2005-11-25 at 14:48 +0000, Joao Paulo Pires wrote: > > > >>'Linux may not be as vulnerable as Windows, but if you think Linux > >>viruses don't exist, you'd better think again. Virus writers have any > >>number of possibilities' > >> > >>I have just read this sentence and I'm concerned because I have only > >>firewall(from router a from FC4) working on FC4. Could you explain to > >>me wich actions I should take? Note: I have Toshiba laptop, FC4, Gnome > >>and Thunderbird. The only programs I know are Clamav and Spamassassin. > >>Is it enough? Although I know FC4 has SELinux. Best regards, Joao. > > > > Windows viruses depend on a large number of users all using the same > broken software. If you step outside the norm, even on Windows, you > reduce the likelihood of infection enormously. Use the Mozilla suite > instead of Internet Exploder and Lookout (Express), and viruses relying > on the vulnerabilities in MS malware. > > In Linux, you don't > a) Have the numbers (as a proportion of all Intentet users) > b) Have a large proportion all using the same software. > > If you check email headers, you will see people here using kmail, > mozilla, tbird, evolution, mutt, pine and probably others, and a few > using Windoes and OS X clients. > > The likelihood of someone writing a single virus attacking more than one > (counting Mozilla ant tbird as one) _and_ getting it to spread is fairly > small. > > Years ago (I was using the then recent RHL 7.3) , Kaspersky released a > virus scanner client for Linux. I pressed them for a catalogue of known > Linux viruses. They came up with a list of five, some of which I'd > heard. At least one was a worm (doesn't spread in email), one was maybe > a problem in RHL 6.2. > > > > > > - Have updated systems! update your system daily. Yum must program your > > yum or apt updates to run at least daily. > > That is plain stupidity. It is worse than securing your system sensibly > and applying _no_ updates. no its not. if thats your policy fine. it shouldnt be an end users policy though. > > If you blindly apply updates as they appear, you will get a broken > system, nothing surer. end users have no clue and thus cant select what they need. actually with only backported fixes nothing should break with tested updates. > > I'm on a list where folk discuss Linux on IBM zSeries. These are serious > folks running serious computer systems supporting serious businesses. > Businesses such as Boeing, Wells Fargo, EDS, Citygroup, Bank of America. > Where people here sometimes think about running a virtual computer, > lotsa those folks run 100 or so in a real box: one maniac became > infamous a few years ago by running 40,000 or so of them. Lots run > virtual networks (and worry about security between them). > > These folk don't apply every patch as it arrives, they look at it, see > what it fixes, evaluate how it applies to them, the risk of not applying > it, the risk of applying it and probably don't apply it until next patch > day. Which might be the next refresh of Nahant. > > In my case, I only look after little systems and I do update regularly, > and I do download updates automatically, but I always update manually, > after seeing what's affected. That way, if something breaks as a result, > I will know that something changed. i do the same on rawhide... actually not necassery though on a fc release with only the default repos enabled. > > If you run yum daily to keep the system up2date and something breaks, > you will have no idea whether something changed, what changed or when. > That's a pretty serious matter if your business depends on it, if you > have a dozen or a hundred staff sitting round talking coz the server's > down again, if you're filing client's email as spam or turning them away > because your website's down. Again. unless you log.. servers should be maintained by professionals actually, those know how to log changes to the system, its possible and should also have a test system ready to test updates as they come... guess what the updates-testing repo is for. > > > > > -- > > Cheers > John > > -- spambait > 1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Z1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Tourist pics http://portgeographe.environmentaldisasters.cds.merseine.nu/ > > do not reply off-list > > -- > fedora-list mailing list > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list >
