http://www.linux-mag.com/2003-09/viruses_01.html
The lesser vulnerability of Linux to viri and similar malware is a plus, but "lesser" does not mean "none at all", as this article, which discusses Linux viri, clearly indicates. It provides a good primer on how Linux can be affected by a virus, with some case studies, and it also touches on the added problems involved with running a Windows emulator.
All this means is that the shouting about the 'weaknesses' of Windows, which has come from several sides in the OS debate, increasingly comes down to the issue of a software monoculture. Even though I accept that by design and heritage Linux and OS/X are somewhat more resistant to malware writers [and I think I am toning down this appreciation a bit], the fact remains that the major reason why Windows systems are most affected is because of their majority status.
Taken to its extreme, if alternative OS deployed in homes and offices shrug off most of the Windows badness, then we have to hope that their deployment in fact does remain restricted, precisely so the 'target' offered to malware authors is not as tempting, allowing us to compute in peace.
Posted by jho at December 23, 2003 08:14 AM