basic - continued
christopher.chan at bradbury.edu.hk
Mon Feb 8 08:06:32 UTC 2010
On Monday, February 08, 2010 03:24 PM, Gilles Gravier wrote:
> On 08/02/2010 07:48, Christopher Chan wrote:
>> On Monday, February 08, 2010 01:01 PM, Michael Haney wrote:
>>> On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 9:33 PM, TSmith<valhalla2100 at comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> What is the best protection programs- i.e., are as good as the best
>>>> Windows protection (anti-virus, trojans& etc.) to use?
>>> For Windows is use AVAST Free Antivirus. Its really good, the updates
>>> are free and its not a system resource hog like Norton and not as
>>> buggy as McAfee.
>> Useless. No scan on read/write. It is just a scanner.
> What do you mean by "no scan on read/write"? Avast is a scan-on-access
> (read or write) antivirus, on Windows.
Yeah, not familiar with Avast and I took it for AVG.
>>> There is a Linux version. I'm thinking about trying it out
>> Hmm...me wonders how it compares to clamav
> ClamAV is certainly NOT an on-access scanner on Linux. It provides
> somewhat on-access when it is interconnected to a SMB file-server, or a
> mail server... but not to file I/O on the system. It's mostly used as an
> on-demand scanner in Linux.
Never said it was on-access. Is Avast on-access on Linux too?
> Thing is... I think Avast has some on-access features, but it's not
> clearly stated. They use components of dazuko project to provide
> file-system related features.
> In any case, unless you're actually building a file server or a mail
> server, having an anti-virus on Linux is pretty much overkill.
More information about the ubuntu-users