And another Ubuntu convert!
gilles at gravier.org
Thu Jan 22 06:13:32 UTC 2009
Mark Haney wrote:
> Gilles Gravier wrote:
>> Hi, Mark!
>> Mark Haney wrote:
>>> I'm a little late coming to this thread, but I have a problem. I don't
>>> like the fact that you told her that she didn't need antivirus.
>>> WRONG! Seriously, this is a dangerous presumption on your part.
>>> Granted there are very few linux viruses, but this type of attitude will
>>> just make virus writers salivate.
>> This has been discussed so many times... I won't add to the debate.
>>> Please, please, throw clamav on there and cron freshclam for the latest
>>> updates. And don't be tossing that around. Everyone needs antivirus,
>>> regardless of OS or the perception of vulnerability of that OS.
>> ClamAV is not an ON-ACCESS virus scanner, it's an ON-DEMAND. I.e.
>> useless for the inexperienced user.
> I don't particularly care which AV you use. Just have one on there.
> That's my point.
So your point is that it makes sense to have an AV that doesn't scan
files automatically? Then when do you actually expect the "non techie"
user to remember to actually SCAN a file?
Having an AV that is not ON-ACCESS is about as useful as having an AV
that doesn't update it's virus definitions regularly.
ClamAV is an engine. You can invoke it manually. You can integrate it
into Nautilus to manually ask it to scan a file. You can even use it to
scan attachments in a mail exchange. But if you think that the simple
fact of installing it on a Linux workstation brings the slightest
protection to a normal user, this is plain delusion.
So I'll not throw clamav anywhere a non technical user is using Linux on
When I give somebody a sense of security, I make sure it's a real, and
known one. ClamAV doesn't contribute to this aspect.
More information about the ubuntu-users