https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_malware
I fucking hate the mentality that Linux is somehow completely safe.
Just because it isn't attacked as much because of the low adoption rate among users, doesn't mean it has no vulnerabilities.
With SteamOS and ChromeOS now having millions of users, Linux attacks will become more commonplace.
IIRC ChromeOS is either built on or can be configured to run applications like a Linux distro?
Yes, so Linux better be ready, because those attacks will increase.
And sentiments like the one from OP don't help one bit.
Malware for desktop users is the low hanging fruit with little rewards. You just hear about it because it's so rediculous easy.
The real money is on servers, so that's were real money/work is invested to develop malware for much higher gains. How successful are they again?
I think you're right. A single desktop, unless it is either someone in a position of power or access to trade secret files, is not a time effective attack vector.
A server on the other hand can access all of that stuff across an entire organization.
Not just that but whenever you hear that company xyz was hacked and their data leaked, what do you think was powering their servers? Most likely Linux. Sure, they usually have more things exposed to the internet, but users install way more apps so the attack surface is vastly bigger in home computers running Linux than servers.
Wine appears in the output of ps aux.
Nervous not-an-emulator noises.
Pro tip: Infect your Windows friends with malware, then get them to switch to Linux
/s
#unethicallinuxevangelismtips
Lol as if Linux is free of malware.
It was, 25 years ago. Same as Windows' security was absent at that time.
But people never update their prejudices, so all the jokes are from the last millenium.
If you want an OS that is really malware-free, you need to run temple os.
If you want an OS that is really malware-free, you need to run temple os.
Can't get malware if the OS is the malware. jk. RIP you crazy genius SOB.
It's also pretty hard to get malware without network capabilities
I never said that Temple OS is usable ;)
God wouldn't let you get malware on his chosen OS.
It isn't, but you're unlikely to encounter Linux specific malware.
Security through obscurity is not security
That's why I use NixOS. Double the obscurity, double the security!
Say that too loudly, and you might upset the apple crowd lol
True story, Linux sees MIME types, so if Hot.Chick.Blows.Brother.mp4 is a virus, it shows up with a Windows (MZ) binary icon, not a media icon ๐... unlike Windows which only recognizes extensions ๐.
Microsoft, in their infinite wisdom, also decided that file extensions should be hidden by default. So you won't even see that you downloaded TaylorSwift_1989_TaylorsVersion.exe instead of TaylorSwift_1989_TaylorsVersion.mp3 unless you changed that setting ahead of time.
Or worse, Numb_LinkinPark.mp3.exe just shows up as Numb_LinkinPark.mp3, making it look like it's DEFINITELY a legit MP3!
Wait.. Real?? I guess its always been a part of the first round of changes I've always made to Windows. Crazy how much I've normalized fighting the software I use.
Anyway, that's wild. What a just bad and unsafe decision.
See, this is mostly because of 2 things. One, when changing filenames, users make the stupid mistake of changing the extension as well (having no extension that is), which of course, in Windows, it means the file won't be recognized as a media file. Two, blind you from the truth - you don't want users that can think, that's not what our bysiness is about ๐. Also the reason behind why Windows has less and less options and people that want to change something have to revert to registery hacks to do so.
It's even worse, since exe files can have custom icons, the malware will have a mp3 player icon in their exe file, making it totes confusing.
That's not a Linux thing. It's just whatever desktop shell you chose to use and various shells behave in various ways. The reason this might be safer in most Linux distros is that you're discouraged from executing things under a privileged user which means that malware can't make significant changest to your system easily. If you do the same in windows, you'd be just as safe.
You guys are quick to forget that Wine (Wine Is Not an Emulator) is, in fact, not an emulator. Most windows ransomware will successfully encrypt your files if ran with wine.
If you're feeling even more paranoid, go with something even more obscure like Plan 9 from Bell Labs. It's Unix-like but differs so much from it that a Unix or Linux type malware would do nothing to it.
I always want to try Plan 9 or one of its successors but actually never do. So many interesting concepts but nothing really to apply them to.
but then the little Wine window appears
the wine prefix is being updated, please wait...
False sense of security. You accidentally downloaded a virus that doesn't work on your system... What kind of habits and hygiene are you rolling with on a day to day basis?
If you use Linux because of this you are just a kid following the hype
Downloading a virus has as much effect on Windows as it does on Linux and any other operating system: None.
Unless it exploits a security vulnerability with something that automatically touches the file. Like a virus scanner.
Next you're going to say https://www.cisecurity.org/benchmark/red_hat_linux exists for fearmongering.
WINE
Also...Get a whitelisting antivirus on windows.
so, I had a pendrive that a friend borrowed once. later on another friend used it and said it had virus. I simply couldn't know since I was on GNU/Linux.
though later on I cleaned it with dd.
I use Arch btw
Sister communities:
Community rules
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
