Linux users can also catch malware - BUT, the CHANCES of this are VERY much lower due to the differences in the operating system. The majority of viruses/Trojans/worms that you just catch are written for “Windows”, for the simple reason that most PCs on the Internet are (still) Windows PCs. And since a virus programmer wants success, which is measured in the infection rate, he of course uses the most popular operating system - and that is Windows.

Malware for Linux is aimed less at PC users and more at servers

• Malware for Linux is aimed less at PC users and more at servers , because the Internet consists almost entirely of Linux or Linux-like servers. On the one hand, this malware has a completely different distribution route
• Malware for Linux is aimed less at PC users and more at servers , because the attempt is to actively get it onto such a machine rather than to distribute it "passively" - and above all a completely different goal (simplified example: many infected PCs become controlled via a server)

Another reason is certainly that it is relatively difficult for a normal Windows user to keep his PC and all the programs running on it up to date.

You install Windows programs (apart from the actual Microsoft programs) from manufacturer websites or magazines (or from dubious sources, which of course you shouldn't do anyway). So you have x different places where you have to track updates.

A normal Linux receives all software from a collection point via a small, powerful program that regularly independently checks whether updates are available for all the installed software.

If there is an update somewhere, depending on the user settings, everything corresponding will either be updated automatically or you will be informed about it - the updates themselves then run fully automatically in the background after confirmation without you having to close programs etc. ...

The point that Linux has a completely different rights management is also very important –

starting with the fact that as a user you are simply not an administrator but only with limited user rights. Period and "isso". And the user has no rights to install anything - so (usually) nothing can be installed just like that. This other rights management is very detailed, so that even if I catch something as user "anja" and the virus would have my rights as a result, it would still not be "allowed" to do many things that are important to it (programs, services) - so it is basically left out in the cold …

But IF a Linux computer catches a "virus", it is usually significantly worse than under Windows.

The admin in Linux is called " root " - and the dangerous parts for Linux are called " rootkit " - they try to somehow get root rights, and since the root in Linux can and is allowed to do EVERYTHING - including rewriting the installed software A rootkit then also everything that "Root" can do... and one of the first things is often the attempt to change the access data for root and lock out the admin... Such a rootkit initially works autonomously and is later controlled remotely - so that you no longer have to use programs fighting against a stupid machine, but against an intelligent human opponent who sees exactly what you are doing and immediately takes countermeasures...

If we now remember the fact that something like this rarely happens on a PC, but on the much more important Internet servers, the danger of a Linux virus should become clear to everyone.

For this reason a clear statement:

Yes, Linux is safer than Windows, but only if the user really knows what he is doing or if I stick to the system specifications 100%. If he doesn't know this and, for example, disables the "built-in protection mechanisms" (the most famous sentence: This worked without any problems under Windows), Linux is significantly more dangerous and at risk than Windows (not just because of the malware).

A big thank you to Anja, who provided us with this article 🙂