Follow
Dr. Damien P. Williams, Magus
@Wolven@ourislandgeorgia.net
+bonifartius 𒂼𒄄
in this thread you'll find
- people reacting passive-aggressive to replies vaguely questioning their status as high priests
- lamenting that there is no gui anti-virus on linux
- hapless appeals to authority
I've said it before and I'll say, again, & again, & again, that jamming "AI" into everything without considering the privacy and security i...
@mangeurdenuage as if the anti-virus gadgets would help on windows when in reality they only make things worse, every time.
:gondola_head: 🌿 
:ignutius: 
:stargate:
@bonifartius There's only one trustable anti virus for windows and it's clamwin and sadly it needs more work for it's real time scan.
@mangeurdenuage on windows i'd really not bother and use the defender stuff.. everything is absolutely proprietary anyway ;) thankfully i haven't had to deal with windows for some years now, the last times all were infuriating. starting with that you can't download an ISO file but need to cook it yourself either on windows or with some hacky scripts requiring root 
@bonifartius
>I'd really not bother and use the defender stuff
For us it's useless yes, but for users having software that is likewise on gnu/linux makes migration go far more easier.
It's a double edged sword I agree but it's better than doing nothing and having users utterly lost with new software gui.
One of the majors things that needs to be done for is for example a Firefox Gui that perfectly mimics google chrome and with that an option to go into "chromium"/compatibility mode for website that can't load/execute if it's not chrome's engine.
Opera did this in the mid 2000s you could emulate IE, FF, etc... any browser you wanted for compatibility reasons.
That way you can force back the market share by being user friendly instead of just replacing the default browser like google did in the mid 2000s via the most popularly downloaded sharewares, and also being the default browser on android like Microsoft did with IE.
>I'd really not bother and use the defender stuff
For us it's useless yes, but for users having software that is likewise on gnu/linux makes migration go far more easier.
It's a double edged sword I agree but it's better than doing nothing and having users utterly lost with new software gui.
One of the majors things that needs to be done for is for example a Firefox Gui that perfectly mimics google chrome and with that an option to go into "chromium"/compatibility mode for website that can't load/execute if it's not chrome's engine.
Opera did this in the mid 2000s you could emulate IE, FF, etc... any browser you wanted for compatibility reasons.
That way you can force back the market share by being user friendly instead of just replacing the default browser like google did in the mid 2000s via the most popularly downloaded sharewares, and also being the default browser on android like Microsoft did with IE.
@mangeurdenuage @bonifartius Yes, the anti-virus available for that proprietary kernel (https://lkrg.org/) doesn't have a GUI, as Linux doesn't have any mechanism for handling a GUI.
The one anti-virus available for GNU/Linux, clamav does indeed have a GUI - clamtk.
A GUI is mostly useless when it comes to clamav, as it's primarily designed for headless mailserver use - to prevent windows computers from becoming infected via email-attached proprietary malware, rather than being for the system itself.
Virus's on GNU/Linux aren't really a thing for this reason; https://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/evilmalware.html - although some do exist, but those have to exploit bugs to install themselves, those of which are soon fixed (there isn't really that many places to hide viruses anyway, plus rootkit-hunter is pretty good at searching through known hiding places).
The one anti-virus available for GNU/Linux, clamav does indeed have a GUI - clamtk.
A GUI is mostly useless when it comes to clamav, as it's primarily designed for headless mailserver use - to prevent windows computers from becoming infected via email-attached proprietary malware, rather than being for the system itself.
Virus's on GNU/Linux aren't really a thing for this reason; https://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/evilmalware.html - although some do exist, but those have to exploit bugs to install themselves, those of which are soon fixed (there isn't really that many places to hide viruses anyway, plus rootkit-hunter is pretty good at searching through known hiding places).
>that there is no gui anti-virus on linux