On 04/26/2012 05:02 PM, Sam Sebastian wrote:
I run a ubuntu (10.04) server on my LAN and generally its off and does
not usually do anything while its on except for me to mess around with
samba and cups and the like. I was told that it would be a good idea for
me to put some kind of anti virus on it. I was wondering if this is
necessary? There are 3-4 other windows 7 computers on the network. And
all of them have anti-virus installed on them (Norton IIRC)
And what about a general linux desktop computer, I know that there are
*some* viruses out there for linux but the most common reason that I'm
cited for putting anti-virus on it is to stop it from giving viruses to
the other computers in the network.
And if so which anti-virus would you recommend?
I'd recommend doing nothing. Just let the Windows machines catch fire
and burn to the ground. Then the users would be asking what to do??
<grins evilly> ...then you install Linux for them. No more worries. You
don't see google installing anti-virus for gmail, do you?
If you DID install anti-virus and it failed, would it then be YOUR
fault? You imply some sort of warranty and acknowledgement of
responsibility by installing the anti-virus (clamav?) and everything
thereafter is your fault. If Norton worked, there would be no problem,
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
ubuntu-users mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users