Winter Knight
Group: Members
Posts: 146
Joined: April 2006 |
|
Posted: April 28 2007,17:27 |
|
From a virus standpoint, using an out-of-date, insecure web browser on Linux is like being 30 feet away from a starving mountain lion, but standing next to a lame dear. You're still pretty safe.
Viruses can be written for Linux. If you caught one, your box could still be used to log your keystrokes, or dish out spam. On a typical linux box, a virus could gain root access as soon as you use su. That would usually take hours, or less. If the virus was designed with DSL in mind, it would have root immediately, by using sudo, just like you do.
However, there are exactly zero viruses in the wild for Linux. As already said, the motive for malicious attacks leads virus writers to Windows. Also, a linux virus would have a hard time spreading, because nine out of ten of its targets would be incompatible Windows. Linux users are generally more savy than Windows users, and won't click on stupid links, and are more likely to have their programs up to date (which usually takes one or two commands. DSL excluded.) Whereas Windows viruses spread like wildfire, an equivalently well written Linux virus would most likely smolder and die before the press found out.
So, you're pretty safe. But don't feel too safe. Trust is what breaks security. Trust is a prerequisite for betrayal.
Quote | Quote (mikshaw @ Oct. 22 2006,20:19) | Also, you might consider that DSL by default runs with all ports closed to remote connections. (maybe one or two exceptions?) |
Does that mean a firewall isn't really necessary for dsl (for a typical domestic user) |
Yes. A firewall is not necessary if you don't have any open ports. A firewall, for Linux, in most cases, is only good for "true stealth", which is a term coined by a guy who talks a lot. It changes your ports from closed (secure) to firewalled (also secure). However, with a firewall, most port scanners will not see you, and will pass on. This might save bandwidth.
|