basic - continued

[Odd]

Knapp wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 7:05 AM, xinchen <xinchen97 at sina.com> wrote:
> 
>>>> 2.No, windows more popular than linux so Windows is much more prone
>>> to
>>>> viruses. quite a few computer user use linux.
>>> There are no wild viruses for linux. Hackers LOVE to capture Linux
>>> machines because they tend to be better computer systems and have
>>> faster connections. There are however other ways to get hacked with
>>> linux so watch out!
>> yes, you are right, Only a few viruses for linux, I think  the main is
>> linux rus on many architectures and there are many versions of linux
>> many packaging systems and many shells. A virus in linux word might
>> affect some people
> 
> I know that I said there were no viruses but I did some research and
> found this!! READ THIS EVERYONE!!
> http://www.geekzone.co.nz/foobar/6229
> So the key here is not to be stupid and also only install from Ubuntu
> repositories!

But there is a difference between Linux and Windows here. This
will not give the malware root access, unless there are some
unpatched flaw it can leverage. On Windows XP, Vista and 7,
malware almost always get admin access. XP runs as admin
by default, and in both Vista and 7, malware can easily bypass
the socalled UAC. Win 7 is even less secure than Vista, due to
changes MS made on the account of usability.

> I  don't think that the many versions of Linux is that big a problem
> to virus writers. Lets face it, most Linux systems are running one of
> the top 5 distros and most of the others are the same distros with
> different software packages selected. Making 5 different viruses is
> not that hard for some slimy professional mafia type hacker.

Social engineering is one of the most effective ways to infect a
OS, and if Linux becomes popular enough, it will happen here
too.

-- 
Odd