Re: Clamav

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


From: "Sam Sharpe" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, 2010/April/17 13:20

> On 17 April 2010 21:05, jdow <[email protected]> wrote:
>> From: "Sam Sharpe" <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Saturday, 2010/April/17 02:25
>>> On 17 April 2010 10:17, jdow <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> <<jdow
>>>> How many people get frustrated with SELinux and simply disable it?
>>> I don't know, but stupidity appears to be an infinite resource. I tend
>>> to believe that if you disable SELinux and you get exploited by
>>> something that SELinux would prevent, then the only thing at fault is
>>> *you*.
>>> However in this case, both a sysctl and SELinux prevent what this
>>> attack claims to do, so if you disable SELinux it still won't work.
>> Are you sanguine to declare Linux cannot be taken over by malware
>> given that the most recent rather dramatic hole found is less than a
>> year old AND new features (hence bugs) are being introduced every
>> day? How much is the data on the machine worth to you?
> You seem to have a general problem with comprehension. That is not
> what I said - I simply said that the exploit you referred to wouldn't
> work.
>> If it means nothing, then why not run Windows wide open and make yourself
>> a hero to the botnet operators? {^_-}
> Don't be an idiot.

I simply gave the extremes. And this discussion is not all that silly
considering "J. Random User" yclept Michael Miles has found a way to
get a virus on his machine that ClamAV might have detected on its way
in or from a scan.

When giving advice it's best to presume the user is going to do something
unusual, such as run Wine, and receive an infection. A Wine install needs
ClamAV. Without Wine I'd suggest chkrootkit and rkhunter, at the least. I
have seen too many perhaps careless people ask "is this an infection?" And
in more than a few cases the answer has been yes. Linux is ahead in the
arms race. Windows is behind. Nonetheless, some protection is worthwhile
depending on how important your system's function, your relationship with
your ISP, and your data might be. I happen to be biased towards "very".
So I bristle when somebody suggests, intentionally or not, that Linux is
probably safe. So is flying, unless you happened to be on the last flight
of Pan Am 103, for example. Low probability of a high value loss - what you
do is your call.


users mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:

[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux