SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
On my linux machines, I run a virus scanner . . .
| 2% | 6 votes |
| 0% | 1 votes |
| 8% | 23 votes |
| 1% | 4 votes |
| 80% | 219 votes |
| 6% | 18 votes |
[ Voting Booth | Other Polls | Back Home ]
- Don't complain about lack of options. You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
- Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
- This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
On my linux machines, I run a virus scanner . . .
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 32 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
(1)
Chess tonight.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 21, @08:40AM
Those famous permissions structures. Here is a diagram for 99% of Linux setups: https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/authorization.png [xkcd.com]
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bart9h on Wednesday October 22, @12:10PM (5 children)
I truthfully voted "never", but should I change to "only when I want to manually check files"?
Would it be relevant to scan with ClamAV an eventual closed source binary I download (mostly Windows games to be used with Wine)?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday October 22, @10:07PM
I have been running various flavors of Linux on our home computers for 20+ years, never had a virus checker, never regretted not running one.
For work, we have the "clamscan" solution worked out for our Linux based products. Only thing clamscan ever found there were viruses in a Windows partition.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 23, @04:13AM (3 children)
Think of it this way: you hope WINE provides enough compatibility to run the games you purposefully execute. But what is the result if it also provides enough compatibility to run the malware you accidentally execute?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by turgid on Thursday October 23, @01:34PM (2 children)
Assuming the malware makes Windows system calls then why wouldn't it? In the MS-DOS days, viruses used to bypass the OS completely and even intercept BIOS calls and redirect them to custom routines. There were these techniques called stealth and tunneling. If Windows's memory protection is badly broken, then I suppose they could still do this. If they're running under WINE, then the whole of memory will look completely different and they probably won't work.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 31, @03:01AM
Exactly so. WINE even provides better compatibility than Windows for things like you mention. Such is the use case for WINE on WSL. However, that is the rhetorical point made. Should you scan Windows executables for Windows viruses run on WINE? The answer is "yes" if you are worried about accidentally running one and it causing problems with your system.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Gaaark on Monday October 27, @06:21PM (3 children)
Basically i only use it when i receive a file from a Windows user and am passing it onto a Windows user.
Scan it, then tell the receiver i scanned it.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 3, Insightful) by KritonK on Saturday November 01, @07:22AM
I run a virus scan nightly, but only because the ISO 29001 auditors at work have demanded that I do.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 01, @11:04PM
Linux only scans for viruses to save Windows systems, so don't do it. The sooner they die off, the better for the planet.