Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why GNU/Linux Viruses Are Fairly Uncommon

gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 117 posts

Re: Why GNU/Linux Viruses Are Fairly Uncommon

#11

Post by jwkane »

tombert wrote: post #8
chc-sc wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the real answer is that relatively few people use GNU/Linux

That's about 95% of it. There are other things that give Linux a bit more of an edge in this space as well. For example, every time I use Windows, it feels like every app is asking to run as administrator. Admittedly, I haven't used Windows for about a year, but in Linux, it's pretty rare that I ever do admin/sudo outside of the command line, and I only ever use it when I know what I'm doing. Obviously this isn't som…

lets not forget the "curl blahblah.com | sudo bash" bit-o-insanity.

Re: Why GNU/Linux Viruses Are Fairly Uncommon

#12

Post by zuuow »

tombert wrote: post #8
chc-sc wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the real answer is that relatively few people use GNU/Linux

That's about 95% of it. There are other things that give Linux a bit more of an edge in this space as well. For example, every time I use Windows, it feels like every app is asking to run as administrator. Admittedly, I haven't used Windows for about a year, but in Linux, it's pretty rare that I ever do admin/sudo outside of the command line, and I only ever use it when I know what I'm doing. Obviously this isn't som…

As if a virus really needed administrator access for anything...

Maybe to fuck up your machine... but if they want to snoop on your passwords, encrypt your files, mine bitcoin, participate in a DoS attack... they can do that without elevating

Re: Why GNU/Linux Viruses Are Fairly Uncommon

#13

Post by saghm »

jwkane wrote: post #11
tombert wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's about 95% of it. There are other things that give Linux a bit more of an edge in this space as well. For example, every time I use Windows, it feels like every app is asking to run as administrator. Admittedly, I haven't used Windows for about a year, but in Linux, it's pretty rare that I ever do admin/sudo outside of the command line, and I only ever use it when I know what I'm doing. Obviously this isn't som…

lets not forget the "curl blahblah.com | sudo bash" bit-o-insanity.

I've definitely seen plenty of `curl | bash` installations suggested before (and can honestly say that I've run some, despite knowing the risks), but _sudo_? Is that a thing that people actually do?

Re: Why GNU/Linux Viruses Are Fairly Uncommon

#14

Post by calais »

ohazi wrote: post #3

On a more serious note, I'm surprised there hasn't been much discussion about potential malware in official Linux package repositories vs. developer-centric source repositories like npm, rubygems, crates.io, etc. One would hope that the bar is higher with strict maintainership rules, but there are a zillion packages, and you can't vet them all. Also, practically everyone installs binary packages, so until we have ful…

This is a flaw with the repository model for software distribution: it confers the authority of the OS developers to packages not scrutinized to the same degree.

Users' metal models of trustworthiness don't track very well the actual scrutiny software is subjected to. This might be a problem with any distribution system.

Re: Why GNU/Linux Viruses Are Fairly Uncommon

#15

Post by pfundstein »

liability wrote: post #6

I've always sort of suspected there might be a 'don't shit where you eat' component to it. If you're just being a dick by screwing with people for fun, not profit, then maybe you screw with the windows users instead of your fellow linux users. Maybe that's giving them too much credit though.

Most malware code I've seen is terribly written and barely works. Hobbyist malware programmers use Windows and write for Windows for the simple reason that it's all they know.

Some skiddies use Kali Linux but only because they managed to follow step-by-step instructions on YouTube without which they're lost.

Re: Why GNU/Linux Viruses Are Fairly Uncommon

#16

Post by jwkane »

saghm wrote: post #13
jwkane wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lets not forget the "curl blahblah.com | sudo bash" bit-o-insanity.

I've definitely seen plenty of `curl | bash` installations suggested before (and can honestly say that I've run some, despite knowing the risks), but _sudo_? Is that a thing that people actually do?

https://github.com/nodesource/distributions#installation-ins... I'm sure there are plenty of others.

Re: Why GNU/Linux Viruses Are Fairly Uncommon

#17

Post by ajross »

calais wrote: post #14
ohazi wrote: post #3

On a more serious note, I'm surprised there hasn't been much discussion about potential malware in official Linux package repositories vs. developer-centric source repositories like npm, rubygems, crates.io, etc. One would hope that the bar is higher with strict maintainership rules, but there are a zillion packages, and you can't vet them all. Also, practically everyone installs binary packages, so until we have ful…

This is a flaw with the repository model for software distribution: it confers the authority of the OS developers to packages not scrutinized to the same degree. Users' metal models of trustworthiness don't track very well the actual scrutiny software is subjected to. This might be a problem with any distribution system.

FWIW, as far as "scrutiny" goes, I think the track record of Red Hat and Debian/Ubuntu on this stuff is about as good as... well, basically any other distribution system I'm aware of. The Android and iOS stores have hosted malware, as has Microsoft's. Steam has pushed bad stuff. NPM is a straight up train wreck...

I mean, I agree in principle that it's a hard problem. But the actual solution we've landed on in the Linux world seems like... well, just not really the first thing we should be worried about.

Re: Why GNU/Linux Viruses Are Fairly Uncommon

#18

Post by tptacek »

tombert wrote: post #8
chc-sc wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the real answer is that relatively few people use GNU/Linux

That's about 95% of it. There are other things that give Linux a bit more of an edge in this space as well. For example, every time I use Windows, it feels like every app is asking to run as administrator. Admittedly, I haven't used Windows for about a year, but in Linux, it's pretty rare that I ever do admin/sudo outside of the command line, and I only ever use it when I know what I'm doing. Obviously this isn't som…

So far as I can tell, there are two kinds of (effectively) single-user systems, in which a malware infection is targeting a single person:

1. The kind where users are rarely asked to assume admin privileges and all the data a user has to protect is available without administrator access.

2. The kind where users are frequently asked to assume admin privileges and some of the data a user has to protect requires administrator access.

I don't believe Linux has any real edge here. I agree that 95% of the effect is due to Linux's paltry desktop user base; I'd guess than at least 4% is due simply to malware that targets Linux not being called "a virus".

Re: Why GNU/Linux Viruses Are Fairly Uncommon

#19

Post by calais »

ajross wrote: post #17
calais wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a flaw with the repository model for software distribution: it confers the authority of the OS developers to packages not scrutinized to the same degree. Users' metal models of trustworthiness don't track very well the actual scrutiny software is subjected to. This might be a problem with any distribution system.

FWIW, as far as "scrutiny" goes, I think the track record of Red Hat and Debian/Ubuntu on this stuff is about as good as... well, basically any other distribution system I'm aware of. The Android and iOS stores have hosted malware, as has Microsoft's. Steam has pushed bad stuff. NPM is a straight up train wreck... I mean, I agree in principle that it's a hard problem. But the actual solution we've landed on in the Li…

That's definitely the feeling I've gotten from the Debian repositories, which are very cautious about what to distribute. I was thinking about it in the abstract.

Re: Why GNU/Linux Viruses Are Fairly Uncommon

#20

Post by zaat »

tombert wrote: post #8
chc-sc wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the real answer is that relatively few people use GNU/Linux

That's about 95% of it. There are other things that give Linux a bit more of an edge in this space as well. For example, every time I use Windows, it feels like every app is asking to run as administrator. Admittedly, I haven't used Windows for about a year, but in Linux, it's pretty rare that I ever do admin/sudo outside of the command line, and I only ever use it when I know what I'm doing. Obviously this isn't som…

>Obviously this isn't something that could not be fixed in Windows, and maybe it already has been.

There is nothing even remotely obvious about that statement. If it was anything near possible it wouldn't an ongoing problem, unsolved for the last 12 years, since the introduction of UAC in Windows Vista.

Now I wouldn't say that Microsoft didn't progress. Far from it. Almost no one I knew kept Vista UAC enabled, as it was constant nag. Nowadays most folks can live with it, and corporations don't feel like they have to disable it and compromise their security to maintain their employees productive.

But it is still annoying way to often for it's own good. Many people are just automatically allowing everything, just like they press Yes or OK on every dialog box without ever reading it.

The reason it is so different on Windows is, in a nutshell, that Windows is a very different beast, and the way users and developers operate on it is not at all similar to what is done on Linux.

The integration of Windows applications with the OS API is something that, for better and for worse, doesn't exist on Linux. Be it the GUI, the Settings storage (registry vs config files) or any other part of the system.

Post reply on HN