All this was not even mentioning that the Linux OS Mobile Computer -
Android - has the worst track record in mobile computers for malware
infection. I operate two Windows Mobile Computers and have been in
Windows Mobile Security since 2002. Linux mobile is approaching simply
being called a joke ! HOT off the presses (newest internet news
publication post) :
Android now top mobile malware platform
ComputerWeekly.com
The share of Android-based malicious programs among all mobile malware
is more than 46%, and growing rapidly, according to security firm
Kaspersky Lab. The researchers say this is not surprising due to the
platform's leading market share, ...
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2011/10/28/248306/Android-now-top-mobile-malware-platform.htm
Android (operating system)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28operating_system%29
"Android is an operating system for mobile devices such as smartphones
and tablet computers. It is developed by the Open Handset Alliance led
by Google....
Android consists of a kernel based on the Linux kernel, with middleware,
libraries and APIs written in C and application software running on an
application framework which includes Java-compatible libraries based on
Apache Harmony. ...."
FYI For Your Information.... In hardball with a User promoting the
opinion that Linux security is FUD, Snake Oil, Promoted by Alarmists,
etc etc etc .... we have a contest to Name The Rock The User Just
Crawled Out From Under lol.
Take a wild guess where all the cross platform infection is going to
come from in Linux ? (Infection from mobile to desktop and vice versa
designs) .
That leaves the Symbian mobile nightmare in the dust. SEE...
http://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=Symbian&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#pq=symbian&hl=en&sugexp=kjrmc&cp=15&gs_id=1b&xhr=t&q=Symbian+malware&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&client=ubuntu&hs=SsK&channel=fs&biw=1024&bih=575&source=hp&pbx=1&oq=Symbian+malware&aq=0&aqi=g1g-v3&aql=f&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=8562193df683b6ce
gerald philly pa usa
ME http://rss.groups.yahoo.com/group/LinuxDucks/rss
(Group Owner)
On 10/28/2011 08:42 PM, g.linuxducks wrote:
> If I didn't know better from your posts in this group I would have
> assumed you were a computer security dummy.
> QUOTEd
> <<<AV software in Linux is a redundancy, IMO. You will get people
> saying otherwise, but there is little conviction in them or their
> argument.>>>
>
> Way back when with Linux and malware it might be called FUD
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fud
>
> Today virtually straight across the board in all security circles
> (obviously) and publications (news sources, blogs, articles, etc. )
> admittedly malware is a concern with Linux now and obviously Apple/Mac
> others. I know that for two reasons. I do windows amateur forensics
> and now involved in Linux and as well I read a zillion RSS News Feeds
> by Professionals and Experts practically daily. I have maintained a
> computer security site since 2005 and can assure you playing ostrich
> with Linux malware will not make it go away. Linux and botnets are a
> study in themselves.
>
> I am well aware of Klam and Clam as only so-so or fair to very fair
> chronically in their detection abilities. With Linux when you go to
> Synaptics Package Manager you can really add a lot to Clam including
> the Third Party Definitions from a handful of the most prestigious
> security companies in the world. These fill a void until Clam catches
> up. As well there are more and more to add for pop mail and web based
> mail scanning.
>
> Now I am not engaging any can of worms here. I indeed appreciate your
> comments. I absolutely do not agree with them but will say in reality
> I lean towards it is currently a blue moon chance of getting infected
> on Linux. There is now spyware for Linux.
>
> Because of your entire views stated but particular where you stated ....
> <<<"...there is little conviction in them or their argument....>>>
> I may say off the bat you are very very very uninformed in Linux
> security. And that's okay. And that's not okay if you are someone who
> knows better and wish to spread help and awareness - meaning you try
> and keep users informed. It's not okay when a friend gets preyed upon
> by malware cyber criminals. You try and help. Knowledge in security
> computing no matter what system is a starting place.
>
> I am walking through this once because I know you are probably adamant
> in your position but I feel compelled as a fellow user to offer
> another view. Of course it is up to you to freely make up your mind as
> to what is real or a convenient truth.
>
> Let me just through this and that towards you as I assume you are not
> aware - and because you feel there is no substance to any reality of
> Linux malware being any threat....
>
> Let's start with you mentioned QUOTEd <<<AV software in Linux is a
> redundancy>>> and that BitDefender for Linux is better. Go to
> BitDefender Linux and sure enough it says on the front page...
>
> QUOTEd http://www.bitdefender.com/business/antivirus-for-unices.html
> "Linux is no longer immune to security threats .....
> Linux operating systems have been considered less vulnerable than
> Windows systems for many years but the myth that they are immune to
> virus attack is completely false.
> The Linux platforms early low instance of attacks was primarily due to
> the lack of root access required for malware to infiltrate the system,
> the Linux communities ability to quickly patch vulnerabilities, and
> the low adoption rate of Linux in the corporate network. This made
> Linux a lower priority target for the writers of malware. However,
> that priority is changing quickly as the platforms popularity across
> sectors increases......" UNQUOTED
>
> Sophos and Eset for Linux have both won the VB100 Award for Linux
> antimalware. Do you understand what that means ? It means there is
> many malwares that will infect Linux that have been thrown at these
> company products in lab testing of the product ability to defend and
> protect. BOTH of those got 100 percent protection in the tests with
> the legal right to display the VB100 logo on their products which is
> the most prestigious award available to antivirus companies.
>
> These are NOT proof of concept malwares. These are not simulated from
> fantasy. These are actual real threats they get tested on as well as
> facsimiles of various malwares. These products (above mentioned) have
> Real Time Protection processes for Linux - NOT simply stand alone on
> demand reactive scanning for threats on Linux. Preemptive heuristics
> for both virus and spyware category threats with Linux.
>
> So I must say to your statement and only in the friendliness of
> discussion....
> QUOTED <<< First point to make is that you do not need to have any AV
> in Linux.>>>
> NO the first point to make in real world as opinion and fact of
> virtually the entire security and news industry is that we as users
> MUST observe that a malware infection is quite possible and possibly
> probable now. This is truth sworn and testified to by the above
> mentioned meaning it is FACT not fiction FUD or Proof Of Concept.
>
> For sake of discussion ONLY have I replied but simply to your main
> comment about Linux security being "...not much conviction in their
> argument..."
> I propose no "argument" at all but to state to you as an assumed Linux
> security dummy (friendly phrase) that indeed as FACT that Linux
> malware and the probability of infection exists and is indeed
> inevitable. Case in point for a Linux security dummy is "How do you
> know your Linux system and files are not infected right now by Linux
> spyware ?"
>
> The most basic introduction to FACT not argument is right here....
> Linux malware
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_computer_viruses
> CLIP:
> "The number of malicious programs --- including viruses, Trojans, and
> other threats --- specifically written for Linux has been on the
> increase in recent years and more than doubled during 2005 from 422 to
> 863"
>
> Some may laugh because Windows viruses have passed one million not to
> long ago and spyware catagory threats are double that now or in other
> words there is a 3 Million chance on Windows as opposed to less than a
> 1,000 chances on Linux of getting infected by malware. Who is safer ?
> Nooooo question - Linux obviously. And that is said with the idea that
> it is assumed the User understands the neccessity to continually
> perform computer maintanance which includes malware scanning either
> hourly, daily, weekly, or monthly.
>
> I recommend you join the Ubuntu security mail by Canonical. Surely you
> do not believe Ubuntu and Canonical are just making arguements rather
> than facts about Linux security ! ! ! Then they would be wasting
> millions and millions of dollars over the years for all the Security
> Updates/Patches/Fix issued by them for Ubuntu Linux, right ?
>
> IN THE NEWS.... http://www.linuxsecurity.com/
> Linux Advisory Watch: October 28th, 2011
> Source: IT Pro Portal - Posted by Dave Wreski
> Hacks/Cracks
> Recently, ESET and Sophos security researchers found out that hackers
> are trying to transfer an old backdoor Trojan from Linux to the latest
> Apple Mac OS X platform. By doing this the hackers are trying to
> expand their reach of PCs which they will be able to use for botnets.
>
> Do you see that ? Two things ? Number one "LinuxSecurity.Com and
> 'Linux Advisory Watch" - these are Professionals in the Security
> field who know everything a Linux computer security dummy does not.
> Agreed ? Linux security and malware are not a popularity contest as to
> who makes the best argument. They report facts and inferred opinion.
> They exhibit samples - real factual samples - not best arguable
> suppositions and surmisings of making best guesses about Linux malware
> to be one's belief and Linux security status and then as it's stated
> view to be considered real world facts.
>
> Secondly above did you see it ? QUOTE "...old backdoor Trojan from
> Linux...." Do you see it ? OLD Linux malware (and very dangerous,
> backdoor trojans are). This is FACT. It is not there reality that they
> are trying to make some believable ARGUEMENT (as you say) of some
> fantasy or proof of concept malware threat to Linux - BUT a for real
> one from days and days ago as very very very well known to
> Professionals and Experts in Linux Security.
>
> Hopefully this reply post is received as intended as nothing personal
> or defamatory or anything BUT to make discussion of a very intense and
> lengthy subject affecting all computer users. Possibly others are
> reading these as interesting and may even add.
>
> I will not engage anything else to the contrary as I stated I have
> been in computing security and have seen your EXACT type view on both
> Windows and Linux for several years as well as many many many others
> including the entire security software industry, caring and concerned
> professionals in security news, and the USA Government with their
> agencies and publications to the public to engage them in awareness
> and learning about the grave threat by cyber criminals through their
> malwares that can not only destroy computers but peoples lives as well
> financially. We most times it seems do not get through to assumed
> ostriches that refuse to admit the threat is real no matter what OS
> (operating system) you operate.
>
> NEWS
> New Mac Trojan Proves There's No Such Thing as a Malware-Proof Platform
> eWeek
> *It's time to accept the fact that any operating system can be
> attacked by malware.* We've been hearing the stories for years about
> how Apple's Macintosh is immune to malware. For years I've heard the
> smug claims from Mac owners about how it's too bad ...
> http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Security/New-Mac-Trojan-Proves-Theres-No-Such-Thing-as-a-Malware-Proof-Platform-180787/
>
> That should be the new dialogue for Users with your view and opinion....
> "It's time to accept the fact that any operating system can be
> attacked by malware."
> It is EVERYBODY else's ! Including mine.
>
> That is only one article from one day among thousands on every day
> yearly year in and year out. NOT meant as any substance to making a
> "better argument" than yours that " there is little conviction in them
> or their argument." as you stated.
>
> I SINCERELY HOPE I personally have offered any Linux security
> knowledge or beginnings to you and that as webmaster of the
> BlueCollarPC.US with over 6 million users since 2005 as WE always say
> "Have a Safe Computing Day" ! !
>
> I would be happy to discuss actual Linux security with anyone but NOT
> whether it exists or not. Fruitless and
> I hope as well I made that absolutely clear. For any posting that -
> well I have said enough that has addressed that already and anyone in
> the know could write you a library of information.
>
> TIP: Talking about virtualization, I have done a forensics in the R2
> Windows 2008 Server patch area on Vista ...
> https://bluecollarpcwebs.wordpress.com/2010/01/07/new-amatuer-forensics-build-in-progress-nimrod-botnet/
> Your dummy speech is not at all fool proof but far from it to today's
> sophisticated cyber criminals. Piece of cake. Virtualization is NOT a
> defense. Fatal error.
>
> gerald philly pa usa
> http://bluecollarpc.us/
>
> On 10/28/2011 08:16 AM, Roy wrote:
>> You are right about klam. First point to make is that you do not need to
>> have any AV in Linux. The only reason to do so is to protect Windows
>> contacts. There are no Linux viruses in the wild and it is dubious that it
>> can harm your computer through Wine, which lacks many of the things that
>> viruses exploit such as Active X and it does not have the same structure in
>> the dummy c drive and you can copy your dummy c drive and just delete any
>> infected drive. AV software in Linux is a redundancy, IMO. You will get
>> people saying otherwise, but there is little conviction in them or their
>> argument.
>>
>> The second point is that Clam is not rated very highly. Bit Defender is
>> given higher ratings. If you want to use Clam there is Clamtk and the
>> nautilus clam scanner extension in the repos.KDE has been quite aggressive
>> in weeding out older KDE 3 based apps like Klam and Klibido (usenet client).
>>
>> Finally while I like your enthusiasm 11.04 is not considered a strong
>> representative of Ubuntu. It is an in-between version. 10.04 is great and
>> 10.10 is better, but 11.04 used a GNOME 2.x base and built Unity on it
>> and nothing worked well and that turned people against Unity. They should
>> have kept GNOME 2.x and had Unity as a sidebar that people could play with.
>> Now with 11.10 Unity is where it belongs. It is build on top of GNOME 3 and
>> it uses either Mutter (Unity 2D) or Compiz (Unity) depending on your card's
>> capabilities. The transition from Mutter to Compiz in 11.04 was not good and
>> Unity 2D was not quite ready.
>>
>> That is both my opinion and my experience. I read hundreds of feeds a day
>> and followed both Natty and Oneiric reviews closely and used both versions.
>> Most analysts had it right on. Unity is a good idea, but it was only half
>> baked in 11.04.
>>
>> That is not to suggest that you should switch to 11.10 if you are happy.
>> Just know that Unity is getting better and it works decently in 11.10 and I
>> could see using it on a full time basis. I also believe that with the kind
>> of resources that Canonical has and their passion that Unity will (has)
>> surpass (ed) GNOME sHell and will be with front runner. People who doubt
>> Canonical and their resolve invariably are proven wrong. They may make
>> mistakes (in releasing something too early) but they get things done and
>> they do it right in the long term. They are the de facto leaders in Linux. I
>> say that as a happy Kubuntu user. I like the slower pace and being left
>> alone. Kubuntu is part of Canonical but KDE developers predominate. We are
>> the unloved child and that is fine by me. The KDE people are doing a great
>> job and Canonical is smart enough to get out of the way.
>>
>> Roy
>>
>> Using Kubuntu 11.10, 64-bit
>> Location: Canada
>>
>>
>> On 27 October 2011 17:51, g.linuxducks<g.linuxducks@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> **
>>>
>>>
>>> Hello Ian, Roy..... (just saying hi, still a new-ish member) I have a
>>> sort of "reading room" forum that I continually post stuff to like a
>>> squirrel hut. Indeed I had posted a good handful of in-the-news- items
>>> about Ubuntu 11.04 .
>>>
>>> I have been following Ubuntu for several years back to about the time
>>> they came out with Wubi as a "prototype" - not as some beta or
>>> something. I got that to run okay. Well things lead to Ubuntu being
>>> about the first, if not actually the first, to come out with the Netbook
>>> Edition for Linux - Ubuntu Linux. This was the Ubuntu Linux 10.04 LTS
>>> Netbook Edition and it worked like a charm on an EEE PC 900 Netbook I
>>> have. (Only 12 Gig solid state drive ! )
>>>
>>> Okay so said all that to say this. The Ubuntu 11.04 is the first release
>>> (and all after) now that has consolidated the download / install as an
>>> all-in-one download. There will no longer be a separate Netbook Edition.
>>> Installing 11.04 (and after) to a netbook will be automatically detected
>>> to install the correct optimized version for netbooks. Immediately below
>>> is an news article about this. As well it has been posted around by
>>> Ubuntu (maybe Canonical too) somewhere - most likely at their sites,
>>> forums, and blogs. (I didn't have those links). Below that article are a
>>> good handful of articles to check out for this new release, although now
>>> not the latest.
>>> BTW by the way I am running Ubuntu 11.04 myself for months now after
>>> upgrading from 10.10. I really like it. Navigation is so fast with
>>> simply the hover over / hide navigation of desktop links, bar. Very
>>> sleek and fast.
>>>
>>> ((( I can not find Klam antivirus for download which was available in
>>> previous versions in the Software Repository (Ubuntu Software). Clam
>>> antivirus is available. Klam works on KDE I believe but has a heck of
>>> interface with in house malware library and other features Clam does
>>> not. )))
>>>
>>> Ubuntu 11.04 will be Optimized for All Platforms
>>> Techtree.com
>>> Installing Ubuntu Linux on a netbook entailed a search for the latest
>>> version of the specially optimized netbook editions. This will be a
>>> thing of the past as Ubuntu is doing away with different optimizations
>>> of the base Ubuntu version. ...
>>>
>>> http://www.techtree.com/India/News/Ubtunu_1104_will_be_Optimised_for_All_Platforms/551-114764-580.html
>>>
>>> Ubuntu 11.04 - The Good, The Bad and The Ugly
>>> ZDNet UK (blog)
>>> By JA Watson , 30 April, 2011 08:22 Various thoughts and adventures,
>>> including but not limited to Linux, assorted bits of hardware new and
>>> old, and occasionally Windows XP/Vista/7. I've just been reading the
>>> comments to my previous post, ...
>>>
>>> http://www.zdnet.co.uk/blogs/jamies-mostly-linux-stuff-10006480/ubuntu-1104-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-10022334/
>>>
>>> Ubuntu 11.04 Adds OpenStack to Linux
>>> InternetNews.com
>>> By Sean Michael Kerner: More stories by this author: The Ubuntu 11.04
>>> Linux release is due out next week and with it will debut a new open
>>> source cloud platform.
>>> The Ubuntu 'Natty' release will include OpenStack, which is an open
>>> source effort that ...
>>>
>>> http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3931556/Ubuntu+1104+Adds+OpenStack+to+Linux.htm
>>>
>>> New Nvidia Linux Driver Supports Ubuntu 11.04 - Softpedia
>>> The driver will indeed support other linux distros as it always has.
>>> It supports the X.org version that Ubuntu uses and that is what the
>>> author of the ...
>>>
>>> http://news.softpedia.com/news/New-Nvidia-Linux-Driver-Supports-Ubuntu-11-04-196264.shtml
>>>
>>> Ubuntu 11.04 - Notes, Tips and Warnings
>>> ZDNet UK (blog)
>>> By JA Watson , 29 April, 2011 10:30 Various thoughts and adventures,
>>> including but not limited to Linux, assorted bits of hardware new and
>>> old, and occasionally Windows XP/Vista/7. As anyone who has any interest
>>> in Linux at all knows (and most of those ...
>>>
>>> http://www.zdnet.co.uk/blogs/jamies-mostly-linux-stuff-10006480/ubuntu-1104-notes-tips-and-warnings-10022328/
>>>
>>> SOURCES
>>> http://linuxducks.free-forums.org/linux-news-and-views-vf14.html
>>> Homehttp://linuxducks.free-forums.org/index.php
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/25/2011 08:23 AM, Ian wrote:
>>>> Roy while I may not use them all I and perhaps other would like to know
>>>> what some of the more useful features in 11.04 do and where to find them.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ian
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
No comments:
Post a Comment