TL;DR - What are you running as a means of “antivirus” on Linux servers?

I have a few small Debian 12 servers running my services and would like to enhance my security posture. Some services are exposed to the internet and I’ve done quite a few things to protect the services and the hosts. When it comes to “antivirus”, I was looking at ClamAV as it seemed to be the most recommended. However, when I read the documentation, it stated that the recommended RAM was at least 2-4 gigs. Some of my servers have more power than other but some do not meet this requirement. The lower powered hosts are rpi3s and some Lenovo tinys.

When I searched for alternatives, I came across rkhunter and chrootkit, but they seem to no longer be maintained as their latest release was several years ago.

If possible, I’d like to run the same software across all my servers for simplicity and uniformity.

If you have a similar setup, what are you running? Any other recommendations?

P.S. if you are of the mindset that Linux doesn’t need this kind of protection then fine, that’s your belief, not mine. So please just skip this post.

  • Justin@lemmy.jlh.nameEnglish
    11·
    1 year ago

    I respectfully disagree. Containers are 100% the right choice in this situation. They provide the defense-in-depth and access controls that combat the threats that OP is targeting by using ClamAV.

    The goal isn’t securing a single database through a single attack vector. And it’s not like ClamAV would help you with that, either. The goal is preventing attackers from using your infra’s broad attack surface to get inside, and then persisting and pivoting to get to that database.

    It’s just not true that you can get the same level of security by running everything bare-metal, especially as a one-man, self-hosted operation.

    • just_another_person@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      Friend, I’m not trying to be rude here, but not only are you failing to understand to question from OP, you’re failing to understand the implications of what you’re also proposing with a container. OP wants to scan static files with an AV solution.

      Are you proposing that they store ALL the files from their file server in a container? Are you suggesting they mount the volume to the container at runtime in order to access and scan them? Both are ridiculous solutions for different reasons. The former is just idiotic because it immediately removes the safety of said files and makes the container non-portable, and the latter because you’re just adding a container as overhead with zero benefit or added security to the host instance, just to scan files at regular intervals. A container with a volume mount is exactly the same thing as running the file servers on the host OS. You’re not making any sense.

      • Justin@lemmy.jlh.nameEnglish
        11·
        1 year ago

        OP is asking for a guard dog to keep robbers from walking through their unlocked door. I’m telling OP to just lock their door and don’t bother with a guard dog.

      • Justin@lemmy.jlh.nameEnglish
        1·
        1 year ago

        I think Lemmy is glitching out here. My comment was a reply to a now deleted comment by just_another_person. It seems that after the comment was deleted, it messed up how the thread appears. Sorry for the confusion.