Clamav out of date

[Harold Hartley]

Brian Fahrlander wrote:
> Harold Hartley wrote:
>
>   
>> We all know that Microsoft server is connected to the internet and has 
>> problems and neededs fixes/patches.
>> Well, the same can go for linux, but it depend on how well a admin or 
>> end user sets up the configurations in it.
>>
>> All in all, neither Linux or Microsoft is superiour over each other and 
>> both ends up with fixes or patches to fix any exploitables hole. Its 
>> just that all the hackers or crackers spends more time writing viurus's 
>> and such for windows and that is why we don't hear much about linux 
>> having problems like windows does.
>>     
>
>     Uh, no.  I don't mean to start a flame war,  but I've wasted most of 
> my life in Microsoft. I've set up thousands of customers between 
> Huntsville, Alabama and Evansville, Indiana, who are now addicted to 
> Microsoft code. They hate their computers, pay all that money, yet can't 
> imagine life without it.
>
>     There is, in fact, an enormous difference.
>
>     When XP was released, as always, there were holes...most, with no 
> reason.  Then came SP1.  Some holes were closed, brand new ones opened. 
>    And again, SP2, same plan.  And just *somehow* virus writers were 
> able to exploit them 20 minutes after leaving the Microsoft download site.
>
>     There is a man in Russia who has posted a bounty.  He will pay you 
> $.06 for every CPU that your program gives him control of. This is just 
> one of the things keeping a growing stable of over 1,000,000 viruses in 
> the typical A/V arsenal.
>
>     Yes, there are exploits. But in Linux they are only accidents, in 
> Microsoft, it's a business. I've wasted enough time (96 man-hours in one 
> case) ridding my employer's computers of a virus that we understood we 
> were protected from. Their software is made by 'bots' that enjoy the 
> props for making it to Microsoft, and put in 8 hours and go home. We 
> write code, take pride in it, and are severely pissed when someone has 
> breaks it.  We actually *care* about the product, even though we don't 
> get paid.  That, in itself is a difference.
>
>     I've heard the "Wait until Linux has 300,000,000 computers" 
> argument; it doesn't hold water. Linux has always had a shorter 
> security-patch release mechanism.  And at no point do we have to be 
> paranoid that a security patch will seriously harm our computers for 
> market-domination reasons; Microsoft can make no such claim. (See the 
> news last week.)
>
>   
I'm glad you pointed this out to me as I have a dell latitude d800 that 
came with windows XP and can't stand the screw ups when I try doing 
stuff on it. I want to put linux on it, but will it work fine when I 
need to swap my dvd/cd combo with a hard drive without having to restart 
the computer to read it... Has linux developed enough to do this.
I've seen major improvements since I've started in 1997 with linux.

>      Sorry; didn't mean to tick you off, just trying to correct the record.
>
>   
Oh, I'm not mad, because whats to get mad about if someone has the 
answers or just correcting someone with the right record.

Harold