Do Linux desktops require anti-virus software?

Symantec has recently provided an anti-virus suite for Mac OS X Leopard, which reminds me of the following problem: if Linux becomes at least as popular as Mac on the desktop, do I still need to sell anti-virus solutions to Linux?

It is ironic that most Mac Anti-Virus products of Symantec, Norton Antivirus 11 for Mac, are actually defense against PC viruses. Moreover, it restricts viruses to Mac systems and prevents them from spreading (via email or other forms) to other machines. Similarly, there is indeed a Linux anti-virus solution, but its main purpose is to prevent viruses targeting Windows users (such as through email gateway ).

So what virus is specially written for Linux? Yes, it does. The features of the open-source platform make it easier for us to fix vulnerabilities that can be exploited by malicious code such as spyware and viruses. An important attraction for running Linux on a desktop is that desktop users are not a major target of malicious code.

I am worried that if Linux has a high desktop proportion, or people begin to trust its Linux system and use bank accounts or credit card numbers on this platform, what will happen? If someone with ulterior motives discovers a vulnerability at this time point and exploits it in large quantities, this vulnerability may harm many people before it is patched. Even if the scope of harm is relatively limited, it may cause panic on Linux security, especially for general users. There will also be such remarks:

"Have you seen it? Linux is not completely secure. This is good. I spend so much money every year to buy anti-malicious code solutions. ."

"Of course! The author of malware absolutely knows how Linux runs. You are a fool! This is the benefit of open source !"

Such remarks will come one after another. Now, I do not think this situation will prove a certain degree of panic. Rather, it is too easy to make a small threat a big problem.

If many bank accounts are stolen, some of them do not care about the advantages of open source and closed source. All they thought was that a small window would pop up on the desktop, "I (anti-malware) is protecting you !", They are interested in anything similar. However, I suspect that we will see that some people will cater to this need, even if there is no basis.

The author does not mean to allow users to depend on themselves. However, we don't want to see people being advertised, and we're wasting money on security issues. Users should be more rational and visionary.

If Linux becomes a more valuable target, will it make sense to have a proactive defense mechanism?