To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I agree on reason Linux doesn't have malware is it's generally savvy users. Ubuntu just doesn't have the same number of idiot users as Windows. However, I think it's hard to over estimate how poor windows is you don't have to do something real stupid in Windows to catch a cold. Yes I can see that when Ubuntu has 30% of the home user market share some will run Sudo so they can see the dancing bunnies, they might even need an AV, but Windows provides basically the ideal conditions for growing malware (even makes me feel quite nostalgic for RISCOS)
"Saying that Linux/Unix is safe from this kind of stuff is wrong"
Absolutely. No OS, Mac, Linux, BSD, Vista, XP... none is imunne from at least the logged on users rights to files. All those files are potentialy at risk.
And yes, all operating systems are vulnerable to spoofs, since the attack is against the user, not the OS.
I'm talking about direct attacks on the OS, other users files, and so forth. If I came accross otherwise, I didn't mean to.
Edited 2007-09-23 13:25






Member since:
2005-07-26
It's true that downloading something and executing it might take a little bit of skill in theory. Unfortunately there is still some work left, because certain programs make this hard:
In Nautilius, if you double-click a .pl file, it might run it using perl.. same thing goes with other poorly configured file browsers.
In Firefox if you goto an URL that points to some extension you might give it the right to install.. if you're a stupid user who wants to see dancing_bunny.xpi in action.
and so on...
Another case might be that you download and run a program you trust and then it does something you don't want it to. Even if you're in userspace this might affect your privacy and sniff up stuff like credit card numbers.
Saying that Linux/Unix is safe from this kind of stuff is wrong, but assuming that the user is smart enough to avoid it is more likely than for xp users.