A Linux Question

I am watching the following Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_lhqg_p21k

So, this man is showing how viruses can be on Linux. He says that he is not running Wine or such. At about 4:45, he shows the results of a virus scan. In it I see, in the results, an .exe file. I thought .exe was a windows executable file. What am I missing? I am sure that this is brain-dead simple, so I thank you for your patience.

There is a reason that rating and comments are disabled on the video :wink:

Yes, I was wondering about that!

I think, for that same reason that Sophos on my Mac complains if I download an infected Windows .exe: these tools look for infected files, regardless of whether they are in fact a danger on the machine you’re using.

Yeah-- both FarFli and Espion are Windows viruses:


So… They don’t seem to support the point this guy was trying to make.

But, what I wonder is if these viruses would have prevented his software from running? A dll file maybe? But not an exe, surely?

It is rather difficult to know what was really going on in this situation, if he had perhaps tried to run the application from terminal we could have gleamed a bit more clarity on the real issue he was facing.

is that the guy that finds a windows virus, but “Linux never gets viruses”… finds a defrag tool for a filesystem that “never needs defragging” (moot now since even he uses and SSD too)… fails to move a HDD from one machine to another (funny, that, I just managed, with a brand new major distro release, but will admit it wasn’t arch)… and doesn’t know about restarting system services (does pacman do that for you if you install a system update?),… ?

gave me the impression of trying to make himself look an expert by using Arch, but other vids show he uses an installer so as not to have to do all that hard manual config.

but the firefox staying in memory is quite a neat demo of the difference between unix-a-like systems and windows when it comes to file locking and what each call “a file”.

as above… there’s a reason comments are disabled. i would click the link but would rather not boost that ego by incrementing his view counter.

I stand by what I said above: these are Windows viruses, and would not affect his use of Linux at all, not one little bit (unless he’s using Wine or something)

He’s probably entirely correct, that Linux fans tend to understate the danger of viruses and malware on Linux. His example does not support his point, though.

I guess I’m in that camp, understating viruses on Linux. If my wife, on her Windows laptop, gets an email that she’s not sure about, I’ll just go and open it up on my Linux machine, or open it up in a VM running Linux. Perhaps I’m being very naive doing that!

Please respect our code of conduct which is simple: don't be a dick.