this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2023
278 points (90.2% liked)

linuxmemes

21222 readers
80 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.

  • Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
     

    Edit: typo

    top 36 comments
    sorted by: hot top controversial new old
    [–] xkforce@lemmy.world 103 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Tbf windows defender is pretty good.

    [–] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 25 points 11 months ago (1 children)

    It has to be, Otherwise Windows would have succumb to microsoft's antisecure culture by now.

    [–] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

    Anti-secure culture? Things have changed a lot since the days of Nimda, SQL Slammer, etc.

    [–] mctoasterson@reddthat.com 10 points 11 months ago

    It is fucking horrible with false positives though. RIP if you have a Kali ISO sitting on one of your drives.

    That and the Antimalware service executable gets hung up and chugs 30-50% of your CPU and RAM and won't stop.

    [–] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

    It's way too reliant on their cloud infrastructure though, causing it to detect and react to malware slower than other solutions and it turns to shit the second the network disconnects. The PC security channel on YouTube has some good analysis of it.

    [–] Dettweiler42@lemmyonline.com 4 points 11 months ago

    To be honest, for most users, if they're not on the Internet; it's not that big of a deal for their antivirus to be less effective. Most threats come from being dumb on the web.

    [–] AlmightySnoo@lemmy.world 43 points 11 months ago (1 children)

    That thing literally saved Windows, as most users would otherwise have had to install shitty freeware like Avast or pay for premium antivirus solutions, basically paying to try to close loopholes that Microsoft made in the first place.

    [–] AtmaJnana@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

    💯

    I almost opted to move my parents to use Linux instead of Windows because of how much time I was spending on fixing the malware and viruses they'd get. Then enter Windows Defender.

    Now all I have to deal with is when they get the occasional scam call... "Yes, it's Bob from Microsoft, you need to wire us $900 to fix a virus."

    [–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 4 points 11 months ago

    Before Defender it was called Microsoft Security Essentials and was a standalone app.

    Worked damn good back then as well.

    [–] cedeho@feddit.de 42 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Most Windows Programs running with root access is like, I don't know... Windows XP era maybe?

    [–] 1337@lemm.ee 21 points 11 months ago (1 children)

    Windows ME was the last edition to make this assumption. NT was never like that.

    [–] kernelle@0d.gs 18 points 11 months ago

    UAC was introduced with vista, IIRC in xp any program would inherit the privileges of the user running them

    [–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

    This is Linuxmemes, what did you expect?

    Up-to-date knowledge of other systems? lol

    [–] cedeho@feddit.de 1 points 11 months ago

    "Up-to-date" is quite unfitting for ~17-18 years :P

    [–] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

    Probably pre-SP2 for that matter.

    [–] Surp@lemmy.world 27 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    You laugh but windows defender is awesome. People give windows shit but the reason it's attacked the most is because of it's market share being above and beyond leaps and bounds sun vs tiny fleck of dust in space os market shares that Linux and Mac os have. No one's wasting time hacking the tiny stuff as much just because its a numbers game. Guarenfuckingtee you if Linux was number one market share OS it would be getting attacked way more often than any other OS as well. Dont kid yourselves.

    [–] pigup@lemmy.world 16 points 11 months ago

    Hey cut it out we're trying to circle jerk here

    [–] RmDebArc_5@lemmy.ml 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    macOS and Linux have additional security features at a system level, on Linux most software comes through controlled repositories or sandboxed flatpaks. There are also tons of multi million dollar companies that constantly try to find and fix kernel level vulnerabilities and a distro like Debian, which is very popular for servers, has had less major vulnerabilities than windows 7 throughout its entire lifecycle and Debian exists for other 30 years. So I’d say Linux is would have a few less (different) attacks

    [–] aard@kyu.de 15 points 11 months ago (1 children)

    Windows NT 3.5 and later NT 4 had C2 security certifications - assuming the system was not connected to a network, and didn't have floppy drives (this was before USB was a thing).

    [–] tehBishop@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

    Dang, a post from 1999!

    [–] artvabas@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    The typo is Windows with a capital W, the rest is just not true, please don't lie😜

    [–] Lmaydev@programming.dev 24 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    Yeah it literally pops a screen sized warning when anything tries to run as admin. Linux is very vulnerable as well. Hackers are just really good at what they do.

    i am going to turn your skull into pasta

    [–] Harpsist@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    How is it whenever I see a post about 'what anti virus should I use' people are always saying 'just use defender - def don't use avast!'

    [–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 18 points 11 months ago

    Because if you're gonna use an antivirus, Defender does just fine.

    They all more or less use the same viral signature database and definitions, and are mostly feature-matched with each other. Why look beyond what your computer came with unless you're installing something integrated with an RMM tool?

    [–] neshura@bookwormstory.social 4 points 11 months ago

    Because, in addition to the other valid points raised, modern "Anti"-Virus Software is often worse than an actual Virus.

    There are way too many pop ups, the menus are confusing and constantly try to upsell you. If you want to remove the damn thing usually it doesn't work, or doesn't work completely, or has a separate auto-updater that reinstalls it after the next boot.

    False positives screw you over good (Kaspersky killed the Ethernet Network on a buddy's PC. He couldn't use the internet on it until he managed to remove that piece of shit from his system completey) and are not less frequent than with Windows Defender but certainly more annoying (see above example)

    If you paid a subscription getting rid of that is a pain as well (BitDefender tried to scam me out of 130€ by sending the billing notif to an email address they shouldn't even have anymore)

    Not all of them are shit like that but most are so sticking with the preinstalled Windows Defender that does 95% of the alternatives results in users having a better experience.

    [–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    Because defender has an amazing malware detection rate with few false positives.

    Much better than even the paid antiviruses like McAfee and Norton.

    Avast used to be good, but then it started to show ads every day.

    Plus, Defender uses close to no resources to run.

    [–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 11 months ago

    windows defender is better than how it used to be where had to buy an expensive proprietary av or download clam av and hope for the best

    [–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

    The only secure Windows is Windows 1.0. There is no network stack in it, and nobody would want to use it anyway.

    Anything else is up for grabs.

    [–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 11 months ago

    but i wanna play reversi

    [–] Pantherina@feddit.de 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

    Does Smartscreen upload your .exes ? I disable its internet access and would be stupid if it only uses that to download databases or stuff.

    [–] biscuitswalrus@aussie.zone 13 points 11 months ago

    It takes a hash.

    [–] Oisteink@feddit.nl -5 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Looking at Kenny most Linux users seems to be clueless fanboys

    [–] recapitated@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

    I would argue most Linux users have no clue they're Linux users.

    [–] neshura@bookwormstory.social 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    Depends on how you categorize "Linux" User, if you include anything running a Linux Kernel as "Linux" then the vast majority have no clue they're using Linux.

    [–] AtmaJnana@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

    I think they're probably just young and enthusiastic. I was like that about linux 20 years ago when I had the energy for it.