Do I really need antivirus programs running?

Red Falcon said:
noob OSes.
Click to expand...

Ubuntu? Debian? :p

Red Falcon said:
Actually, yes, there is.
Click to expand...

Security through obscurity isn't real security. Andriod is a good example of what would happen. Linux will never get popular as a mass of different distros. It will more likely that an ultra noobish, ultra beginner Rocketfish-like distro like Ubuntu 10.04LTS x64 will become popular and the others continue to be ignored.

When that happens and it becomes a worthwhile target the whole obscurity thing goes, so will the "different setup security feature". There's not going to be a load of Noobuntu users making their own custom "secure" setups anyway. Anyway, Windows has sandboxing and signed drivers etc. etc. exactly like some Linuxes and some extra stuffs. Linux servers.
 
Red Falcon said:
Actually, yes, there is.
Sorry to rain on your parade, but with so many different distros and variations of how GNU/Linux is configured, not to mention user customizations and alterations, it would be nearly impossible to make a "mass" vulnerability through the OS itself.

To clarify, I am talking about GNU/Linux, not Droid/Linux, they are very different.
Click to expand...

Or you could argue that with so many distros and variations no one is really making sure each one is as secure as it can be. Case in point anyone who has ever run a web server knows that exploits are aplenty in the linux ecosystem. An exploit could sit there for a long time without anyone realizing it because it was specific to a distro or package. And a big exploit could be sitting in a common piece of code because everyone is so busy managing their separate distros.

The reality is security comes from exploitation not much of anything else. Linux security has been the result of the fact it is so widely used in web servers in critical situations and windows derives security from its high use in business where the same is true.

The only major difference I think exists is the fact that MS always allows their default users to run as power / admins which I have always felt is a mistake, but then again I guess it worked for them for a good many years.
 
Funny how you all are saying these things about a thread for AV programs for Windows.

Yeah, Windows, secure, that's a good one.
The words "Windows" and "secure" do not belong in the same sentence.

Funny how I've never worked on a Linux system with worms, trojans, malware, viri, etc.
 
Red Falcon said:
Funny how I've never worked on a Linux system with worms, trojans, malware, viri, etc.
Click to expand...

I guess you just haven't been around enough, or adminned enough systems.

I've worked on Linux systems with worms, trojans, and viruses. Many of them. Linux is just so much less common, not a lot of people bother writing worms and trojans and viruses.
 
Red Falcon said:
Funny how you all are saying these things about a thread for AV programs for Windows.

Yeah, Windows, secure, that's a good one.
The words "Windows" and "secure" do not belong in the same sentence.

Funny how I've never worked on a Linux system with worms, trojans, malware, viri, etc.
Click to expand...

You must be new to the industry. Congrats on your first job!
 
kumquat said:
I guess you just haven't been around enough, or adminned enough systems.

I've worked on Linux systems with worms, trojans, and viruses. Many of them. Linux is just so much less common, not a lot of people bother writing worms and trojans and viruses.
Click to expand...

[urBoss]

How'd all that happen, Mr Sysadmin?

[/urBoss]
 
kumquat said:
I guess you just haven't been around enough, or adminned enough systems.

I've worked on Linux systems with worms, trojans, and viruses. Many of them. Linux is just so much less common, not a lot of people bother writing worms and trojans and viruses.
Click to expand...

Or you're just a really sucky admin. :rolleyes:
 
eod said:
You must be new to the industry. Congrats on your first job!
Click to expand...

Wow, if you guys are running around with infected Linux systems, you must really not know how to secure or work the OS, or you just suck at your jobs.
 
Yes, the only machines that ever get infected with anything are improperly run.

Sure thing.
 
kumquat said:
Maybe you should come do my job for me.
Click to expand...

lol, maybe I should.
If I did, everyone wouldn't be running around with infected Linux systems.

When I see individuals like you, I make the realization why OS X has a market. :p
 
Last edited:
You could say the same thing for windows its not a good argument. Lots of people here love to run with no AV and claim they have never had a virus.
 
rudy said:
You could say the same thing for windows its not a good argument. Lots of people here love to run with no AV and claim they have never had a virus.
Click to expand...

Like I said, "Windows" and "secure" don't deserve to be in the same sentence together.
The registry is enough reason on why Windows isn't a secure, and super-corruptible OS.
 
As interesting as all of the linux/unix info here, this isn't a general security thread and even mentioning linux/unix is going off topic. This thread is for Windows security and yes, the words go together... ;)
 
Red Falcon said:
Like I said, "Windows" and "secure" don't deserve to be in the same sentence together.
The registry is enough reason on why Windows isn't a secure, and super-corruptible OS.
Click to expand...

How many people can we get to agree that the registry is Windows is a horrible thing?

Why can't we go back to the days where every program stored it's own settings in .ini files?

Sure would cut down on a whole lot of registry problems.

If the registry HAS to be there, why can't they just keep anything but Windows itself from being able to write stuff to it?

For programs that are already out there that use the registry, have Windows have those programs have their own seperate "registry" to maintain compatibility.
 
Red Falcon said:
Are you really ripping on Debian, one of the most flexible Linux branches in existence?! WOW. :eek:
Click to expand...

I rip on all non Gentoo flavors of Linux... :p

Red Falcon said:
Like I said, "Windows" and "secure" don't deserve to be in the same sentence together.
The registry is enough reason on why Windows isn't a secure, and super-corruptible OS.
Click to expand...

I've never had or seen "registry corruption", ever, since like forever. Sounds like user error in your case... :p
 
03grandam said:
He isn't the only one, I have never experience this either.
Click to expand...

I just had a system come in yesterday that was running Norton 360 that had a corrupted registry.
Uninstalled Norton and installed MSE, scanned and found a crap ton of malware and trojans.

Yes Windows can have a corrupted registry.
The registry is Windows' biggest weakness.

Hell, anyone with noob-level skills in VB scripting can destroy the registry with little effort and no admin rights.
 
"Corrupted registry" must mean something different to you. A machine with an actual "corrupted registry" means that the actual registry files are hosed and the machine won't boot.
 
kumquat said:
"Corrupted registry" must mean something different to you. A machine with an actual "corrupted registry" means that the actual registry files are hosed and the machine won't boot.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, a corrupted registry may allow the OS to still boot, but some or many programs will operate incorrectly or not at all.
Also, the OS will boot, but then later BSOD/crash at random, or have random anomalies occur such as programs shutting down, random reboots, etc.

A corrupted registry doesn't necessarily mean a fully broken OS.
 
Last edited:
Red Falcon said:
Not necessarily, a corrupted registry may allow the OS to still boot, but some or many programs will operate incorrectly or not at all.
Also, the OS will boot, but then later BSOD/crash at random, or have random anomalies occur such as programs shutting down, random reboots, etc.

A corrupted registry doesn't necessarily mean a fully broken OS.
Funny how you know so much about something you "have never seen happen". :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I'm not the one who said I've never seen a corrupted registry. That was someone else. Try to keep your posters straight. There are actually several people responding to you. We're not all the same person.

What you describe as a "corrupted registry" I'd call a registry error. They're fixable, but it's almost never worth it. To me, a "corrupted registry" is an actual corrupted file that is really not fixable except by reverting to an older good copy.
 
kumquat said:
I'm not the one who said I've never seen a corrupted registry. That was someone else. Try to keep your posters straight. There are actually several people responding to you. We're not all the same person.
Click to expand...

Oh of course you are all the same person! :p :eek:
nvm, nothing to see here...


What you describe as a "corrupted registry" I'd call a registry error. They're fixable, but it's almost never worth it. To me, a "corrupted registry" is an actual corrupted file that is really not fixable except by reverting to an older good copy.
Click to expand...
I've fixed two of these systems in the last few weeks as well, needing to use nTune to create newer SP discs for the OSes to repair the old or missing files to the newer versions.
 
Sounds like a lot more work than just pushing out a fresh image or just restoring from the previous night's backup.

Not to be snarky, but in this day and age that's how it should be. There are so many good online and home backup services, from Crashplan to WHS to Time Capsule and even Dropbox that losing actual data should not be an issue. Simply having an external hard drive that backs up the entire system partition nightly and keeps a weekly or monthly pretty obviates the need for any file repair. Working data should be stored on the network, in a synced online folder, or on a separate partition or disk in the machine so a corrupted registry will not affect it.

If you're talking about fixing other peoples' machines... eh. I used to do that many moons ago, but not really worth my time. I'll toss the drive into another PC, pull off the data they want, and reinstall the OS. Fixing registry entries or rolling out repaired files just postpones the inevitable in my experience.
 
At home I use W8 + a paid version of MalwareBytes so I also get the active protection + firewall. I think that's the bare minimum I'd suggest to people.
 
kumquat said:
Sounds like a lot more work than just pushing out a fresh image or just restoring from the previous night's backup.

Not to be snarky, but in this day and age that's how it should be. There are so many good online and home backup services, from Crashplan to WHS to Time Capsule and even Dropbox that losing actual data should not be an issue. Simply having an external hard drive that backs up the entire system partition nightly and keeps a weekly or monthly pretty obviates the need for any file repair. Working data should be stored on the network, in a synced online folder, or on a separate partition or disk in the machine so a corrupted registry will not affect it.

If you're talking about fixing other peoples' machines... eh. I used to do that many moons ago, but not really worth my time. I'll toss the drive into another PC, pull off the data they want, and reinstall the OS. Fixing registry entries or rolling out repaired files just postpones the inevitable in my experience.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm talking about fixing other people's systems.
If I know it can be salvaged, I'll restore the registry and back-end kernel files to stability or 100%.

If not, I'll just wipe the system and do a clean install.
I love not having to do any of this bullshit with Linux and UNIX distros.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top