bob wrote:It is crap like this as to why I run Unix and don't worry about all this nonsense.
Thinking that using Unix will prevent you from viruses/malware is rather naive (the same applies to Mac/Android/anything else).
What about zero-day exploit in Linux kernel? http://thehackernews.com/2016/01/linux- ... acker.html
What about heartbleed in OpenSSL?
Software contains bugs, no matter how good it is.
You are certainly safer on Unix simply because it's not a popular target, but this may change in the future.
Windows is literally a heaven for malware though with doors wide open, I dare to say it's one big backdoor.
Using some AV on Windows is a must, you don't even have to visit suspicious websites;
see recent case with Forbes serving malware ads (not their fault but still) - those who use AdBlockers were safe.
If you program in C, why not just use Visual C++ on Windows? You can compile your C sources if you use standard C libraries or portable ones. i do the opposite, keeping my C++ libraries portable between Windows/Linux/OS X but I develop in Visual Studio, after a lot of trying in almost all major modern IDE (CodeLite, CodeBlocks, Eclipse, xCode, BC++ Builder...).
On Windows there's nothing better, IMHO, and I don't earn money directly from MS
bnemias wrote:Visual C++ doesn't have an installation option: "Just install the cmdline compiler. And no, I don't want .NET VB C# J++ or any other MS junk."
I can't speak for HGM, but my compiler needs require maybe 200 MB. Not 4.5G as one Visual Studio installation cluttered my drive with once.
It's at your choice not to install VS. You can choose only C++ during installation but yes, it requires a lot of disk space. You should remember that on Windows you already have a lot of MS stuff... the OS itself is one of it.
Maybe you can cross-compile from Linux to a Windows exe but I've never try this, so I really don't know how to do it.
bob wrote:It is crap like this as to why I run Unix and don't worry about all this nonsense.
Thinking that using Unix will prevent you from viruses/malware is rather naive (the same applies to Mac/Android/anything else).
What about zero-day exploit in Linux kernel? http://thehackernews.com/2016/01/linux- ... acker.html
What about heartbleed in OpenSSL?
Software contains bugs, no matter how good it is.
You are certainly safer on Unix simply because it's not a popular target, but this may change in the future.
Windows is literally a heaven for malware though with doors wide open, I dare to say it's one big backdoor.
Using some AV on Windows is a must, you don't even have to visit suspicious websites;
see recent case with Forbes serving malware ads (not their fault but still) - those who use AdBlockers were safe.
Naive?
I have been using Unix since 1977. System V from AT&T Ken sent me a copy for a PDP 11/44 I had... When I moved to birmingham we were using both BSD on our val, and System V on some at&t 3bx computers we had. I have been running Unix (Linux mainly) since. Care to guess how many viruses I have had? Exactly ZERO.
A software bug is NOT a virus. Antivirus software will NOT fix the heart bleed issue, or any other sort of kernel bug. But viruses that take over and replicate? ONLY if you allow it to happen. Stupidity is the cure for all security protection.
The only legitimate computer virus that affected Unix was caused by Sun microsystems in 1986, when they distributed a version of sendmail that had a debug option enabled that allowed one to send an email that contained executable scripts that could then send mail elsewhere. Took the internet down for a couple of days to get a stupid student prank off all the machines connected to I1 at the time.
Unix actually has a reasonable security consciousness built in. Microsoft chose to open up everything to make a system idiot-friendly. You can have it.
You tried to restore a moved file from quarantine and somehow got a message "access denied".
Ripping of an running executable must have produced some garbage.
I would first try to reboot. Maybe logging in as "Administrator" helps.
I liked cygwin when i was tied to windows, but linux is the better experience in any case.
Oliver
Last edited by BeyondCritics on Thu Feb 25, 2016 12:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
bob wrote:A software bug is NOT a virus. Antivirus software will NOT fix the heart bleed issue, or any other sort of kernel bug. But viruses that take over and replicate? ONLY if you allow it to happen.
Software bugs imply security risk (vulnerability). It's really that simple. AV will not fix bugs in other sw but it may catch malware (that's the whole point).
If you are unlucky and get some ransomware that encrypts your data, then all you can do is pray (or get some bitcoin)
mar wrote:If you are unlucky and get some ransomware that encrypts your data, then all you can do is pray (or get some bitcoin)
Or restore from backup. If you backup regularly, you begin to concern yourself with how absurdly large new windows versions and windows software installations become. It's the difference between 10 minutes and and hour for a full backup.
@HGM
Aside from installing mingw in cygwin environment (just a couple of checkboxes on the install packages). another option is to install mingw on your linuxVM and use that to compile your windows binaries (could save you some time going back and forth but maybe not).
@Bob
Absolutely I agree. In all my years using macs and linux i have never had a malware issue. But as I said, some places demand that you have anti virus anyway to get on their networks. Not saying it's entirely rational, but it happens which is where clamAV comes in, and doesn't do anything unless you set it up to do whatever. So it's very unobtrusive.
