From: Waider (waider at domain waider.ie)
Date: Wed 25 Sep 2002 - 11:21:03 IST
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
McGahon, Dermot wrote:
| Would either of these two products (Kaspersky & Sophos) have followed the
| cleanup procedure described in the link from Justins email, and would
| of these two products have downloaded patches and patched apache? You know
| it's a waste of time trying to glean such information from their websites.
No, and you know that, and if you don't, you should.
The antivirus software I've seen for Linux does what it says on the tin:
it scans for viruses. Some of 'em scan for windows viruses, some of 'em
might (?) scan for stuff like the li0n worm or whatever, but as with
windows, none of them is a solution for keeping on top of patches for
your system and, well, not being a stupid user.
However, installing these on your system isn't going to hurt it, and if
it makes the problem you're having go away then it's not entirely useless.
Anti-Virus software for Linux isn't 100% useless. There are enough
clueless people using root accounts as their default login that there's
a genuine risk of Windows-style infection, although not on as wide a
scale; additionally, people who don't patch their systems in a timely
fashion will get bitten by whatever's prowling the net.
If it's really a big deal for you, don't install the software. Put in a
startup script that says, "starting anti-virus software", put in a
desktop tool that shows it running, whatever. Fake it. The way to get
Linux accepted is through not making it into a point of contention, even
if it does mean following a stupid line from time to time.
Still, if you're determined not to bow to the stupidity, that's your choice.
waider at domain waider.ie / Yes, it /is/ very personal of me
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu 06 Feb 2003 - 13:19:03 GMT