antiX-forum

How safe is AntiX-7.1? Sorry for asking but I am really new to Linux and running no antivirus or anti-malware makes me feel uncomfortable!!!. Do I need to install a firewall given the fact that my laptop is already behind the router's one (as configured to default settings from the adsl provider)? Reading a bit about Linux, I discovered the iptables command where a set of network traffic rules can be set. Lysistrata does not have any, so do I need to configure network traffic rules?
If I have to use additional software (AV, firewall) what would your recommendations be?

Many thanks
Christos

Lchris
AntiX does indeed use iptables. Security is adequate in antiX out of the box but you can use a gui front end to make adjustments if desired----Guarddog, for example (in the repos). Virusus in Linux are not entirely unheard of but are extremely rare. If concerned, you can download and implement clamav from the repos.

As moron said, Linux virus's are extremely rare and I believe only proof of concept. I don't think there has ever been one in the "wild". iptables and the front ends such as guarddog and firestarter are more for protecting and controlling your network against intrusion. Clamav is good for virus's but I think mostly for windows problems if you have a local network.

Myself, I am behind a router along with one windows box and several Linux boxes. I have never had any problems with virus or intrusion in linux and don't use anything other than the router. The windows box does use antivirus and anti adware to protect itself but I think that's the norm now.

eriefisher

Many thanks moron and eriefisher for your replies. I did a quick reading of the Guarddog's online manual where I found an online security test from GRC. I run the test and my antix-based system passed it with success. The only thing which did not "pass" was the ping reply but I do not think that is a problem as I am having a dynamic IP. Finally, I might install the clamav just for manually scanning files that I transfer to my XP system.

Christos

PS The test results:

GRC Port Authority Report created on UTC: 2008-04-08 at 11:43:40

Results from scan of ports: 0, 21-23, 25, 79, 80, 110, 113,
119, 135, 139, 143, 389, 443, 445,
1002, 1024-1030, 1720, 5000

0 Ports Open
0 Ports Closed
26 Ports Stealth
---------------------
26 Ports Tested

ALL PORTS tested were found to be: STEALTH.

TruStealth: FAILED - ALL tested ports were STEALTH,
- NO unsolicited packets were received,
- A PING REPLY (ICMP Echo) WAS RECEIVED.

You have to be careful with GRC. Sometimes it's your isp that is responding and not your own machine so the results may not be entirely accurate. You should still be ok though.

eriefisher

Lchris wrote:ALL PORTS tested were found to be: STEALTH.

TruStealth: FAILED - ALL tested ports were STEALTH,
- NO unsolicited packets were received,
- A PING REPLY (ICMP Echo) WAS RECEIVED.

I am almost certain that the ping reply came from your router and not from your computer. In any case, it's not as big a deal as the GRC site makes it out to be. The important thing is making sure that you don't have any open ports (unless you're running a publicly-accessible server, in which case you can't avoid having some open ports).

Phil

Two questions - if this is considered hijacking, please let me know - how about including clamtk and a firewall app on the next iso? Thanks.

john