Benötige ich unter Linux einen Virenschutz?
Diese Frage bezieht sich sowohl auf Linux Desktop PCs als auch Linux Servern die in meinem Heimnetz hängen (die Server haben auch Ports nach außen).
Maßnahmen die bisher getroffen wurden:
Server:
SSH Keys
ClamAV als Virenscanner
Regelmäßige Updates und Backups
Ufw Firewall
Nur die nötigsten Ports
Fail2Ban
Regelmäßige Kontrolle der Logs
Sichere Passwörter
Dienste die geöffnete Ports haben, laufen auf einem account ohne root.
OS: meist Ubuntu Server
Desktop:
Sichere Passwörter
Keine Ports
ClamAV und TK
Nur Sichere Software aus den Repositorys.
Regelmäßige Updates und Backups.
Regelmäßige Kontrolle der Logs und verdächtige Änderungen.
Surfen / Online Banking etc. nur mit eingeschaltetem Gehirn.
Ufw Firewall mit sehr strengen Regeln.
Was denkt ihr benötigen meine Systeme noch irgend einen zusätzlichen für Linux verfügbaren Virenschutz?
(3 votes)
Loading...
ClamAV or virus protection at all, I only have servers that use Windows users in a larger style, for example as file servers. I’ve never had a Linux virus in many years, just a lot of false alarms and Windows worms. The thing is a pretty memory pig and takes a full GB of RAM, which is not worth it for a simple web server that is only used by few trusted people.
What I additionally use on the servers is tripwire. This makes checksums via files in configured directories and also recognizes new or removed files and stores the Kram gnupg-signed. You can then regularly see if something has been changed. Of course, it is necessary to update this in the case of updates, so with an auomatic update function you should remove /usr from monitoring and monitor only /etc.
As long as you don’t go to the Internet with root rights, the risk of capturing malware is extremely low. There are no scripts that are able to leverage root.
Kali Linux is open as a barn gate to stay with the example. The system becomes vulnerable.
You need to be as careful with Linux as with Windows. Enter usernames and passwords on links – also does not protect Linux.
LA
My Opinion
No, you don’t need virus protection. Keep your packages up to date, then it fits
This question cannot be answered so easily.
In no case can one say that virus protection is unnecessary!
The thing is that Linux does not allow viruses or other pests to start themselves and snap into the system.
The server is the easiest. He doesn’t execute “wild” any code. Austricksen to lame the server or get unauthorized data is one thing that can happen again and again in all systems and also happens. But nobody intervenes and inadvertently executes malware which then has access to everything.
It looks quite different on the PC. If you have many users, build some crap and start malware. This cannot spread in the system, but still cause enough damage with the user permission.
But even if no one else goes to the PC, how often do you give your root password on demand without thinking? If you check exactly why you enter your password and what is done with it, that is as good as absolutely safe. But as I said, there’s always something like updates, etc. where you can enter the PW and thus give the malware full control.
If the malware has full control, a virus checker will no longer help.
So the question cannot really be answered, it depends on the circumstances. It doesn’t hurt to have a virus checker. Whether and how much he brings is “doubtful”.
The thing is that Linux does not allow viruses or other pests to start themselves and snap into the system.
It looks quite different on the PC. If you have many users, build some crap and start malware. This cannot spread in the system, but still cause enough damage with the user permission.
Desktop why many users? if you have on a server many users or services.
Some companies also have more than one PC that all employees must share 😉
Sure, there’s never been. Rootkits on Linux how is this going? In a kernel module? In shared libraries? Impossible!
It’s always curious what you read here.
All right!
then let it scan.
How can you just install something like that?? he always has accessed everything you do. have you got so much to do than these? already funny the viren scanner viren already recognize before they are unpacked.. and how can a scanner scan at all when your windows are encrypted. I already know that there is memory read writing which then read the data sets and the tcp packages.
Why was it Kaspersky banned? The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has Kaspersky is prohibited because it fears that the company “is an unacceptable risk to nationals Security the United States’
That’s very different from linux. not to otherwise decide to take the entire server operator linux.
why is andoid just an extension of linux?
Yeah.
The risk is lower because the hackers and virus creators naturally focus primarily on the common operating system. But there is always a danger.
Do you know current and working Linux pests?
A link would be great. Thank you.
Under unixoded operating system, virus scanners make no sense. Especially due to the consistent sandboxing, pests have virtually no chance at all, as long as the system is not “capitulated”.
ClamAV is also not intended to combat unixode viruses, but to use the safe operating system environment to eliminate pests for other operating systems. This makes sense only if, for example, the Unix system is used as a server for file storage for Windows clients. (See https://wiki.ubuntuusers.de/ClamAV/
Therefore: Uninstall ClamAV if there is no contact with a Windows system.
There is contact. In the same network as the computers and servers, there are also some Windows systems, including Windows Servers, which are responsible for Active Directory. The ClamAV only covers this point is aware of me.
Short and good:
Virus protection always makes sense, whether Windows or Linux.
But in rough terms, you are simply better protected by IMMER on Linux.
You can see how often you need to enter your password if you want to install something or change it.
The in-house software center is also a good protection against dangerous programs.
On Windows you have to download and install a program on the Internet, and from any website. And you don’t find all the required programs at chip.de
It depends very much on virus protection. Some of these so-called. “Protection programs” are more likely to break into the system than they repair. See e.g.
https://www.heise.de/news/Virenschutzsoftware-von-Bitdefender-und-Trend-Micro-attackbaren-9987394.html?wt_mc=rss.red.ho.rdf.post
Yes, with the virus protection closing other vulnerabilities.
Hello Alfred, which virus scanner is looking for Linux pests?
The next few years I had also intended to survive. So I’ll need it.
Why is Elster? Runs in the browser and thus completely independent of the OS. Sure, it’s not the horniest, but yes…
Otherwise you can try it with Bottles or a VM. Even if the VM runs badly, you can use it for one time a year.
It is a control program and I have not found a comparatively simpler or better one for Linux.
The normal system-wide-installed and with standard settings: not that I know. Short internet research is right.
You can run wine, for example, via Docker or so and then it is in a sandbox.
About Bottles you can Wine programs in a sandbox run. It may be that your desired programs do not run in it. Play with me. Please install via Flatpak, otherwise you only have partial sandboxing.
My recommendation:
Yes, well I need but Wine, aren’t the programs somehow executed sandboxed?
Wine allows to run Windows programs. 99.9% of all viruses are Windows programs (.exe). If I don’t have a wine, a Windows virus can’t touch me.
Similarly, it is with the M$ Office macro viruses: if I have no M$ Office, I can also not catch one of these viruses because they do not work under LO. Thank God the compatibility with the macros stops!
The problem with Wine is, it does not work for all Windows programs:
I tried MS Paint, paint.net and Windows Movie Maker.
None of the 3 programs I can use despite Wine.
Okay, wine I need for some Windows programs, is that SO risky?
I use Linux (for years only Linux) and have no background virus protection installed. I have ClamAV, if I had to check something, but I don’t really use it.
I only use packages from official sources (Ditributions + Flathub) and have no wine installed. Firewall running. Thanks to LibreOffice and deactivated macros, I am also protected from M$ office macro viruses. In addition, I don’t load any kind of crap out of the net, do not visit any web page that has been running (not without a script blocker) and keep my system up to date (thanks to rolling release). And just the last points protect against viruses. Often better than any so-called. Antivirus system.
Would you use a virus protection under Linux? Do you even use Linux?
Does he?
Under Windows certainly, but Windows also has more vulnerabilities than a Swiss cheese hole.
Under Linux not necessarily. Always depends very much on the application. For example, ClamAV v.a. is suitable for searching for Windows viruses in emails, so this makes a lot of sense for a mail server.
It is important in both cases: No system protects against its own stupidity.
According to the BSI, no virus scanner is required for Linux.
By the way, ClamAV seeks Windos pests.
linux is open source it is easy to see if it is a virus.
I have 20 years linux servers experience. never had a virus.
Also in the desktop area I have never liked one!
What do you want to do with the system that you take such protection??
!
According to the ClamAV website, ClamAV is used to find the windbreakers on Linux servers that are delivered to Windoscomputers in mails.
Many inexperiences do not understand this and assume that there are Linux pests that need a search program.
Don’t mean bad, but are you having trouble writing? Because you always write “Windos” although it actually means Windows?