Comments on: Best Linux Antivirus – Kaspersky, Clam, & Norton http://cybernetnews.com/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/ Technology News Sun, 22 Nov 2009 18:45:09 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Peter http://cybernetnews.com/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/comment-page-1/#comment-121996 Peter Fri, 09 Nov 2007 14:14:33 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2007/08/10/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/#comment-121996 @Pieter: You may be right that the scanners detect only Windows viruses, I've never actually checked if they tackle non-win ones as well. But even if that's the case - THIS is the point of them. I'm running different flavours of Linux and Windows on my machines and all of them have anti-virus soft installed. Why? Because the last thing I want is to pass infected files (ie: just by forwarding an email). This is extremely important in business cases. And generally: I'm surprised that there is no mention of NOD32. I'm using it [read: my clients use it] on Linux mail and file servers in mixed OS environments (+ on Linux and Windows workstations) and I know I can sleep easily. It would be good to get similar comparison with NOD32 included. @Pieter: You may be right that the scanners detect only Windows viruses, I’ve never actually checked if they tackle non-win ones as well. But even if that’s the case – THIS is the point of them.
I’m running different flavours of Linux and Windows on my machines and all of them have anti-virus soft installed.
Why?
Because the last thing I want is to pass infected files (ie: just by forwarding an email). This is extremely important in business cases.

And generally:
I’m surprised that there is no mention of NOD32. I’m using it [read: my clients use it] on Linux mail and file servers in mixed OS environments (+ on Linux and Windows workstations) and I know I can sleep easily.

It would be good to get similar comparison with NOD32 included.

]]> By: AlternaGeek Technology Podcast Network » AlternaGeek Episode 10: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot http://cybernetnews.com/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/comment-page-1/#comment-113522 AlternaGeek Technology Podcast Network » AlternaGeek Episode 10: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:37:01 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2007/08/10/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/#comment-113522 [...] Cybernet: Best Linux Antivirus - Kaspersky, Clam, & Norton [...] [...] Cybernet: Best Linux Antivirus – Kaspersky, Clam, & Norton [...]

]]> By: Pieter http://cybernetnews.com/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/comment-page-1/#comment-113210 Pieter Sat, 11 Aug 2007 08:00:04 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2007/08/10/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/#comment-113210 Correct me if I'm wrong but although these scanners are made for Linux, they only detect Windows viruses. Therefore such a scanner would be unnecessary as these viruses can't do any harm in a Linux environment. Unless you use a dual-boot system and regularly access your Linux partitions on Windows and vice versa. If you install system updates as soon as they're available (most Linux distributions come with an updater system), the chances of you getting a Linux virus is very small. I for one have never used a virus scanner on Linux, and I have never had to do with a virus yet. And remember: viruses cannot activate themselves. The user needs to go to a malicious website, open a certain attachment or execute a certain file first in order for the virus to start doing its job. If you're smart enough, you don't need a virus scanner, even on Windows. Yeah, you should do it (at least on Windows) to be on the safe side but think about it: have you ever had a virus that snuck in without requiring you to take any action? Probably not. These antivirus products are a rip-off, unless you're using a free product of course. :) Correct me if I’m wrong but although these scanners are made for Linux, they only detect Windows viruses. Therefore such a scanner would be unnecessary as these viruses can’t do any harm in a Linux environment. Unless you use a dual-boot system and regularly access your Linux partitions on Windows and vice versa.

If you install system updates as soon as they’re available (most Linux distributions come with an updater system), the chances of you getting a Linux virus is very small.

I for one have never used a virus scanner on Linux, and I have never had to do with a virus yet. And remember: viruses cannot activate themselves. The user needs to go to a malicious website, open a certain attachment or execute a certain file first in order for the virus to start doing its job. If you’re smart enough, you don’t need a virus scanner, even on Windows. Yeah, you should do it (at least on Windows) to be on the safe side but think about it: have you ever had a virus that snuck in without requiring you to take any action? Probably not. These antivirus products are a rip-off, unless you’re using a free product of course. :)

]]> By: Daryl http://cybernetnews.com/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/comment-page-1/#comment-113182 Daryl Fri, 10 Aug 2007 21:22:22 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2007/08/10/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/#comment-113182 I was surprised that there were so many readily available viruses for Linux, I'd always thought the only reason to run AV on a linux box was if it was a mail server for windows machines. So I downloaded the test set to my trusty linux machine and... They Were All Windows Viruses!... Linux won't do much with those exe files. If you want the viruses, or an excel spreadsheet listing them by name, they can be found here: http://virus.untangle.com/ Daryl I was surprised that there were so many readily available viruses for Linux, I’d always thought the only reason to run AV on a linux box was if it was a mail server for windows machines. So I downloaded the test set to my trusty linux machine and… They Were All Windows Viruses!… Linux won’t do much with those exe files.

If you want the viruses, or an excel spreadsheet listing them by name, they can be found here: [virus.untangle.com]

Daryl

]]> By: Mohan http://cybernetnews.com/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/comment-page-1/#comment-113178 Mohan Fri, 10 Aug 2007 19:33:47 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2007/08/10/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/#comment-113178 Sweet article, and very informative. Thanks for the info, although currently I don't use and antivirus on my laptop (Ubuntu 7.04) I should look into AVG or ClamAV. Sweet article, and very informative. Thanks for the info, although currently I don’t use and antivirus on my laptop (Ubuntu 7.04) I should look into AVG or ClamAV.

]]> By: Ryan http://cybernetnews.com/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/comment-page-1/#comment-113169 Ryan Fri, 10 Aug 2007 17:28:38 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2007/08/10/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/#comment-113169 Norton caught 100% of the known viruses, it wasn't until they mixed things up a bit that it missed some of them. They said that they took user samples of some viruses, some of which they believe are zero-day and custom made, and that's where Norton missed a few. But I agree, being that it is a large company that is seen on many corporate machines it should be catching much more than that. Norton caught 100% of the known viruses, it wasn’t until they mixed things up a bit that it missed some of them. They said that they took user samples of some viruses, some of which they believe are zero-day and custom made, and that’s where Norton missed a few.

But I agree, being that it is a large company that is seen on many corporate machines it should be catching much more than that.

]]> By: Tinhed http://cybernetnews.com/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/comment-page-1/#comment-113168 Tinhed Fri, 10 Aug 2007 17:28:04 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2007/08/10/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/#comment-113168 Well I am not surprised by the results for kaspersky or Norton. symantec has been shipping a sub-standard product for ages now and i personally use AOL active virus shield on my windows machine and i am extremely happy with the Kaspersky engine. What surprises me is the performance of Clam AV. Have to try it out on my Kubuntu installation. Well I am not surprised by the results for kaspersky or Norton. symantec has been shipping a sub-standard product for ages now and i personally use AOL active virus shield on my windows machine and i am extremely happy with the Kaspersky engine. What surprises me is the performance of Clam AV. Have to try it out on my Kubuntu installation.

]]> By: CoryC http://cybernetnews.com/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/comment-page-1/#comment-113166 CoryC Fri, 10 Aug 2007 17:09:35 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2007/08/10/best-linux-antivirus-kaspersky-clam-norton/#comment-113166 It interesting that Norton performs about the same on Linux as it does on Windows, both in term of using lots of system resources and the effectiveness of it's engine. What surprises me it that the person who conducted the test said, "...Norton also performed well." 88.6% is not a good performance for an antivirus application that's trying to catch KNOWN viruses. Everyone say this with me: 88.6 percent is not good enough! Symantec is one of the largest security companies and they offer a mediocre product. As long as the are given a pass for poor performance it will continue. It interesting that Norton performs about the same on Linux as it does on Windows, both in term of using lots of system resources and the effectiveness of it’s engine.

What surprises me it that the person who conducted the test said, “…Norton also performed well.” 88.6% is not a good performance for an antivirus application that’s trying to catch KNOWN viruses.

Everyone say this with me: 88.6 percent is not good enough! Symantec is one of the largest security companies and they offer a mediocre product. As long as the are given a pass for poor performance it will continue.

]]>