From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-148593-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 169D11381F3
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 20:32:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2FBBCE09DD;
	Fri, 12 Jul 2013 20:32:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-wi0-f180.google.com (mail-wi0-f180.google.com [209.85.212.180])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7500E09D5
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 20:32:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wi0-f180.google.com with SMTP id c10so1094896wiw.7
        for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 13:32:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlemail.com; s=20120113;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
         :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=sbwglBf3svO0MJO7CA2ApabRF8Whu4GBqdn/oNf6ELI=;
        b=xj/XJgTxQm9uS2IsvAki1pKR3aMnSRW5up6iWZ4DDzErL0wETFlxgcV/SsgoIt9BjA
         oM7ZnNgoHHYKY6Ho4ZZttcJ4a+IGFIs0Xp/GpTz/lAOT3yzuoueY57GHmOSe641JhZHC
         LSRCMkAht4XHiv7lhGpmq+wjv8X7GBUL0fwhNF+c1FU+sRZLQP18XmSo4sOXofYQg6Vu
         Vyod+Fl8Q+YpooyIDt94l94+LuA/+x2Rw/Cu5RtPOz6B/HGxt6YXYKEUx3/7SZypiFGA
         ZWnqsGs/H05qxI59+NStOUn2YscQzxF72k7zQMqYhfnBsB51UZzOlV/pgPRPYvEwqpZC
         yDZQ==
X-Received: by 10.180.211.7 with SMTP id my7mr2651496wic.26.1373661140410;
        Fri, 12 Jul 2013 13:32:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.21] (p549C7B36.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [84.156.123.54])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id em10sm5413356wid.1.2013.07.12.13.32.19
        for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Fri, 12 Jul 2013 13:32:19 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51E067D2.8030402@googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 22:32:18 +0200
From: Volker Armin Hemmann <volkerarmin@googlemail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130629 Thunderbird/17.0.7
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user]  Linux viruses
References: <51D728BA.4060906@gmail.com> <51E030A5.5010504@taydin.org>
In-Reply-To: <51E030A5.5010504@taydin.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: 9453b5b3-adb8-43fa-b717-13464af977cc
X-Archives-Hash: a2821fb7943fde32dfc71e2831a525da

Am 12.07.2013 18:36, schrieb Timur Aydin:
> On 7/5/2013 11:12 PM, Dale wrote:
>> I since did some googling and it seems I am right and he just thought I
>> was some know nothing guy he could sell some service too.  Anyway, has
>> anything changed to make Linux more prone to viruses than it used to
>> be?  I read a percentage somewhere that said like 99% of viruses are
>> windoze only.  Is there a indisputable source of information on this?
>
> Linux is inherently more secure than Windows, but it isn't so much
> more secure that only 1% of all viruses can attack it. Virus
> developers don't have a financial incentive to develop Linux viruses
> (not enough Linux users, most Linux users knowledgeable about
> computers, and moral reasons).
>
moral reasons... you just made my day....