Re: Linux as a target? But is this really the case?
That's a pedantic difference without a distinction. When malware infects a computer running Windows, but it used something other than a kernel vulnerability to install itself, do we say that it's non-Windows malware? No, we don't, because it's running as a program on a Windows host. In this case, the malware can run as a program on a Linux host, thus it can infect Linux systems. You still have to leave something for it to find, but that's true with Windows in almost all cases.
I'm a Linux proponent, but I have to say that some of us sound like those annoying "You don't get viruses on Macs" people. When anything infects a Windows machine, someone is there to say how bad Windows is and how much better Linux would have been. When malware infects a Linux machine, they find some excuse for why it doesn't technically count. Malware runs on everything and there are variants intended for running under Linux. We all know that's true, so let's stop pretending it's not.