• Ooops@kbin.social
      3·
      9 months ago

      Malware for desktop users is the low hanging fruit with little rewards. You just hear about it because it’s so rediculous easy.

      The real money is on servers, so that’s were real money/work is invested to develop malware for much higher gains. How successful are they again?

      • Gork@lemm.ee
        2·
        9 months ago

        I think you’re right. A single desktop, unless it is either someone in a position of power or access to trade secret files, is not a time effective attack vector.

        A server on the other hand can access all of that stuff across an entire organization.

    • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
      1·
      9 months ago

      Not just that but whenever you hear that company xyz was hacked and their data leaked, what do you think was powering their servers? Most likely Linux. Sure, they usually have more things exposed to the internet, but users install way more apps so the attack surface is vastly bigger in home computers running Linux than servers.

  • Raccoonn@lemmy.ml
    5·
    9 months ago

    Way back in 2003, I had a school project partner over to do some work on a project. They had a floppy that was infected with some malicious stuff and had planned to utterly trash my computer with it. I only found out at a later date because some guys were asking me questions about my computer, and someone spilled the beans whenever they realised that my computer wasn’t infected and was indeed still functioning completely fine…

  • ShinyRanger@iusearchlinux.fyi
    2·
    9 months ago

    You guys are quick to forget that Wine (Wine Is Not an Emulator) is, in fact, not an emulator. Most windows ransomware will successfully encrypt your files if ran with wine.