No one bothers to make malware for software that is used by <1% the world population when you can make malware for Windows, used by ~85% of the world population.
I am a distro hopper, I have hard time to decide what Linux I should use, but I would say that Linux Mint is the choice if you're about to switch. Especially wiht Cinnamon desktop environment. As xxJackxx says. The main reason for Linux safety is that ordinary Linux users are not so interesting to the bad guys, there are so "few" of us so they dont target the average Linux user, it they do target something they go for the Linux servers (lots and lots servers are Linux) and they are protected well enough I guess. Then you have the fact that you dont run as an administrator by default. People who use standard user account in Windows are way more protected than the most windows users who most likely run in an admin account. When I used windows I didnt use antivirus most of the time, I just ran as a standard user (although I browsed and had my email in a super tight sandbox ("Sandboxie" which I miss sorely in linux ) The third factor is software repositories, at least in Ubuntu and its offspring's but I guess it is the same with other variants of Linux. If you download the software from there you are pretty safe since they are controlled. But hey, nothing stops you use software like Clam antivirus if you want to feel the fuzzy feeling additional security brings. No harm using it. It wont affect performance, but it probably wont find anything since there is not much to find Fact is that the times I used antivirus in Windows it only found false positives through heuristics. Given the fact that Linux has comparatively few viruses its even harder to get infected. Only time i got infected was back in the 90s when I was experimenting doing my own viruses with virus maker software i found on the net
Sounds like Linux users are easy targets. I searched for statistics. For some reason nobody is telling the actual sample size of which the percentages you can find are based on or to how many users that actually equals. So I'm doing it myself: There are about 3.174 billion Internet users The percentage of Linux users is approximately 0.78% That equals to 24,757,200 Linux users that use the internet. The 2018 Stack Overflow developer survey says that about 23% of professional developers use Linux. These are pretty good numbers considering that probably 90% of them are not using Anti-Malware. Good news for every Bot-net provider. Seriously, go get Anti-Malware. How can you even be sure that you're not infected if you're not using one?
How can you be sure you're not infected even if you are using one? It all boils down to probability and getting infected with Linux Mint is the equivalent of winning the lottery without having entered it.
"both AV-Test and WatchGuard have released reports claiming that Linux computers are among the fastest growing targets of malware over the past year and a half." https://www.linux.com/news/2017/7/linux-malware-rise-look-recent-threats I can totally see why that is judging by my numbers. Also I suppose every Linux malware runs on any distro.
Well, thanks. However, assuming the figures are correct, 0.78% is still only 0.78%, and 24.8 million is still very small compared to the 35.94%, or 1.14 billion Windows users, and I would guess, probably actually much more, as there are most likely many (most?) people who are using both Android and Windows, so I doubt the percentage of OSs correlates that closely to the number of users using each one. In the same way I also suspect there may be many more Linux users than the figures would indicate. Just circumstantial evidence from people I run across in person and on the internet, I would think the percentage of Linux users is higher. Plus, again, many people who use Linux also use Windows to some extent. I also don't know how the numbers are calculated to begin with; Windows users are, as far as I know, required to buy and register the OS, so they probably have some ballpark figure of the number of (legitimate) users. Linux users, not so much. If they went by the number of downloads for the OS, the number of Linux users could be even less, as, in this year, when I first started using Linux, I've downloaded at least four different distros. I guess the only way they could get close is if they can tell which and how many of each OS is accessing the internet. Plus, Linux users may overall be a little more sophisticated in a sense when it comes to knowledge of computers and OSs, making them more aware and harder to target. I think most people who just want and OS that does what they want without them having to dig into the internals and try different distros and such, are going to go buy a system preloaded with Windows. I've known too many Windows users who have loaded AntiVirus and forgot about it, thinking that was all they needed to do be safe, and their computers have become loaded with all kinds of stuff. So, even if the figures are meaningful, who are the malware scum going to target, the small percentage of Linux users who may be somewhat knowledgeable, or the 46 times as many Windows users who think they are protected because they put all their trust Windows Defender or whatever? By the way, until this year I've used nothing but Windows. Linux Mint Cinnamon was the distro I started with when I switched to Linux, and it sold me on Linux, it's a great distro. However, after experimenting some, and getting new hardware, I've settled on MX Linux. I agree Mint is a good distro for those switching from Windows, but overall I prefer MX, I can't say if it would have been harder for me if I switched to it first or not, but with Linux, you can always try different distros.
That links seems to be talking about Android when it's talking about Linux. Malware for Linux Mint (for example) does not run on Android, or vice versa. Different distros run different security features, so it's not a safe bet that malware for Ubuntu will run on Fedora, for example. Also important to remember is that sandboxing is pretty much a standard on Linux by now. Chrome is incredibly secure running on Linux because of the excellent sandboxing.
Excellent point per windows users who load the AV and carry on business (happy clicking) as usual until they notice something is different all of the sudden or worse. There are plenty of malware that AV's can stop or try to stop, yet there are others that AV's may stop at one point but the interruption continues due to code force entanglements that require specialty tools to completely eradicate. For me Linux is a learning curve but one I will welcome since it's my choice to opt MINT in place of the Windows 10-the consistent interruptions are not acceptable even with WD as effective as it's become. Users want and expect a productive peaceful & reasonable computer experience and not a machine gummed up with noise and I found Linux Mint is as peaceful and enjoyable experience as I ever seen. I do have Windows 8 + 8.1 perfectly tame and expect it will be the final windows version I ever own. Maybe 7 too since I never knew what it was like. But Linux? Yes-and as you point out there is a variety of their releases one can try to see which suits them best
Somehow, Linux wasn't as big a learning curve as I had expected to get it to do all I needed, and that probably is due to all the work the Mint (and MX) team have done, though there is still a lot I could learn. Probably being a little more security aware (I guess that's why I'm on this forum) I didn't have much problem with malware and stuff on Windows, but as you say, Linux has still been a relatively peaceful and enjoyable experience. Definitely less resource intensive. One other thought I had as far as the number of users go; Mac (OS X or whatever, I'm Apple ignorant and use the terms "Apple", "Mac", "OS X", "iThing", or whatever, pretty much interchangeably) users have several more times users than Linux, according to that site. I know people who have switched from Windows to Mac because of all the problems they had on Windows, and from what they tell me, that have been pretty trouble-free since. So, if you're going by numbers, I would think Mac users are in more danger of being targeted than Linux. Plus, as was mentioned about ransomware, I would think Mac users are a better target as expensive as Apple products are.
That would make sense for the simple reason they're much more affluent. Besides, from my experience with Mac users they're computer illiterate too
From my limited experience I would say that's true. The users I know went to Mac because they couldn't keep their Windows clean. I suspect the biggest danger to us Linux, and Mac, users may be complacency. But I'm not worried about getting complacent as long as I know I'm immune.
What? I don't understand your reasoning here. It doesn't matter if one user has two different OSs or not. If both are used they are counted. Yes. Why? Because I said: -------------------------- 1: That is irrelevant. 2: Yes. Please click links if they are provided. They explain how I got the numbers. The professional developers that use Linux (23% of ALL OF THEM) and program all the software we use, for example. Pretty good target: Let's you access the sourcecode of many programs. Easy, once you're on it, because nobody uses anti-virus. (apparently) And then there are the other 19 million that you can add to your bot-net. Ok, thanks. I think I'll try it next. I really start to hate Windows 10 and I'm fed up with Microsoft mothering. Hm. You could be right. But it also says: "A decade ago, Linux was obscure outside the server world" which indicates the usual Linux again. I'd assume if they were talking mostly about Android, they would just say it, because it is its own OS nowadays.
Hmmm, and yet the numbers only add up to 100%. Hint: go look at the poll section of this forum, select a poll with a lot of responses where more than one answer is allowed. If there are people who have voted for more than one item, when the totals are added up there will be more than 100%. For example, suppose five people total vote. Four of the five vote that they use Windows, and two of those vote that they also use Linux, and one just uses Mac. 80% use Windows, 40% use Linux, and 20% use Mac. That's 140% by my math. It seems to me your math only works if each of the 3.174 billion internet users are only using one OS. As I understand it the site you gave (http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share#monthly-201807-201808-bar) is only giving the percentage use of each operating system accessing the internet, not the percentage of users using each one. I hope that makes sense.
Apparently you do, you brought it up. From that site you gave, do you think that really only 36% of people who access the internet use Windows? I would bet the total is much higher. Probably just about everyone you know uses Windows. Otherwise, you are correct, the safety of an OS depends on more than just the number of people using it.
Dude. This is including mobile, tablets and console. I'm sure the numbers are an accurate representation. I wasn't sure how the CIA defines a internet user or how to properly connect the two sites. So I just used the lowest percentage available. If I set it to desktops only, Linux will have 1.78% with 56mio or something. Its accurate enough.
Well, setting the number to desktops only more than doubles the number of Linux users you seemed to be concerned about getting an accurate count of, bolstering your argument that that should somehow make Linux a prime target for malware authors. But whatever, dude. Maybe now you're starting to get an idea of why few people are attempting to give actual numbers on how many users are using each platform.
Any way to make Mint 19 boot faster? I've disabled startup programs, just seems a little slow booting up.
It's an absolute beautiful release IMO even though I too notice some delay on booting up. Takes longer than mint 18 for sure.
Mint is pretty much the perfect GNU/Linux distro in my opinion. And, it's not just the fact it has less market share as to why it isn't targeted as much as Windows. There's multiple reasons from running none admin by default to Apparmor, SELinux, No arciac registry, use of Sandboxing, very fast security patching. Linux isn't bulletproof, nothing is, but it's extremely secure. If people think the only reason or even the main reason Linux distros don't get targeted is because of low market share they're kidding themselves. And, for anyone just browsing, visiting forums, checking emails and a bit of YouTube and Netflix, online shopping ect you're 100% better off using a Linux distro than Windows.
In my MBR computer these are the boot times... Mint Cinnamon 18.3... 17 seconds Mint Cinnamon 19 ..... 22 seconds In my UEFI computer this is the boot time (my hardware isn't compatible with Mint Cinnamon 18.3)... Mint Cinnamon 19 ..... 12 seconds
Nice stats on that one @Brian K Boot time delay of a few seconds doesn't really raise much issue on this end due to I know this hardware I run is not exactly to the level of newer machines. But any delay in anything, including software response times is always an attention getter. Especially when you've experienced better rates.
