One of my bosses seems to think that servers are free from viruses/worms so long as they are left alone (no one uses it for word processing, etc.). I thought that was crazy bec. of the mere fact that it is the server... everyone in the network is using it! Sure... virus infection could be minimized but infected files could still get in through other means. Besides, companies like Symantec would have no market for NAV for Gateways/Servers if left-alone servers never got infected. So if you were the one to politely explain it, how would you say it? Thanks for your input.

Your boss is right. Servers should be immune from viruses/worms if well maintained (patches are being applied, etc). If not, then you should really reconsider your choice of operating system and other software installed.

There are market for gateway/server antivirus products, because those machines receive infected data very often. While the server itself won't be infected, having antivirus product installed on the server will prevent viruses/trojans from infecting other machines.

priyadi - I think you may have missed the point of the original post. ;) MMiguel is saying his boss thinks servers that are left alone will not get viruses. That is very far from the truth (I dare you to install a clean win NT 4.0 installation and don't touch it for a while... it'll be comprimised within hours)

You need to tell your boss that servers need to be patched frequently (daily?) if you want to keep them safe. Otherwise it's like rolling the dice (if you do not patch machines, they WILL get comprimised, it's only a matter of time). Even if you run win2k, your machine will be very secure if you check for new patches daily...

Thanks for the tip, guys. By the way, I'm a her.

[QUOTE]MMiguel is saying his boss thinks servers that are left alone will not get viruses.

Sorry about that! I was actually thinking about it when I was writing it, but putting in a bunch of his/her and he/she's was getting confusing! :)