Viruses in PUPPY Linux, YES, "Viruses in Linux"
Posted: Sun 19 Jun 2011, 16:18
This thread is a discussion thread. It is NOT posted to annoy or distract in discussson.
Preface
As a past systems engineer, I have always considered it misleading in Linux to say "not vulnerable to viruses", yet, point to Windows and brand it "vulnerable to viruses" without ever articulating WHY???
Discussion
How many of us, have followed the line and never thought/asked why is one vulnerable and not the other? Most of my colleagues over the years, in the industry, have NOT asked this question and have blindly accepted this to be the case.
Here's some ideas:
If one can exploit a OS via a browser, would this apply if I attacked Linux filesystems instead of M$ filesystems?
If one can exploit a system by placing a keylogger in a running desktop, does it matter which OS I do that as long as I "look" to see which OS I going to monitor?
If a trojan is dropped on a system, and it is designed to operate on a particular OS, does it matter whether its M$ or if its Linux?
These are not just random examples (and, I can think of many more examples), but, moreover, all of these, by definition, fall under the umbrella of viruses?
If we take a practical view and define "exploiting an OS, to do something that devastates it or something that monitors-captures data unsuspectingly, as a virus", then we have a whole new viewpoint where all OSs are vulnerable in many of the same ways as long as I can have a transport mechanism to get it to its hosts for spreading.
OS/X as many of us know, is a derivative of Linux. Apple, most recently acknowledged this. Its a "virus", everyone.
So what makes us accept the fact that Linux does not have vulnerabilities while M$ (and now Apple) does??? (Dislike for M$ does NOT change the problem...."viruses"!
Looking at it from this perspective, do you have any ideas that can help us all (and is there something about Linux that insulates it from exploitation)? (Please, no one use the "root" user argument. Its an invalid argument that I'd rather NOT cover in this thread. There are lots of other threads which address the "root user" topic.)
Thanks in advance for ideas on this discussion topic. And be sure to Google "Apple OSX virus announcement 2011"
Preface
As a past systems engineer, I have always considered it misleading in Linux to say "not vulnerable to viruses", yet, point to Windows and brand it "vulnerable to viruses" without ever articulating WHY???
Discussion
How many of us, have followed the line and never thought/asked why is one vulnerable and not the other? Most of my colleagues over the years, in the industry, have NOT asked this question and have blindly accepted this to be the case.
Here's some ideas:
If one can exploit a OS via a browser, would this apply if I attacked Linux filesystems instead of M$ filesystems?
If one can exploit a system by placing a keylogger in a running desktop, does it matter which OS I do that as long as I "look" to see which OS I going to monitor?
If a trojan is dropped on a system, and it is designed to operate on a particular OS, does it matter whether its M$ or if its Linux?
These are not just random examples (and, I can think of many more examples), but, moreover, all of these, by definition, fall under the umbrella of viruses?
If we take a practical view and define "exploiting an OS, to do something that devastates it or something that monitors-captures data unsuspectingly, as a virus", then we have a whole new viewpoint where all OSs are vulnerable in many of the same ways as long as I can have a transport mechanism to get it to its hosts for spreading.
OS/X as many of us know, is a derivative of Linux. Apple, most recently acknowledged this. Its a "virus", everyone.
So what makes us accept the fact that Linux does not have vulnerabilities while M$ (and now Apple) does??? (Dislike for M$ does NOT change the problem...."viruses"!
Looking at it from this perspective, do you have any ideas that can help us all (and is there something about Linux that insulates it from exploitation)? (Please, no one use the "root" user argument. Its an invalid argument that I'd rather NOT cover in this thread. There are lots of other threads which address the "root user" topic.)
Thanks in advance for ideas on this discussion topic. And be sure to Google "Apple OSX virus announcement 2011"