In any operating system in which the user has write and execute permissions for their home directory is vulnerable to "viruses" to some extent, this is not a limitation of the operating system, but simply a logical conclusion when you think that modifying the object code of a program is all thats needed to create a "virus".
True, there have been some known Linux viruses, but none of these can do any damage to the core operating system if they don't have root permissions. Milanche, do you run programs as root apart from system administration? Probably not. The fact is that, just because it is possible for one program to modify the object code of another program doesn't mean that the OS is susceptible to viruses. The virus has to be able to write outside the user's home directory, and that is where the real security strength of Unix lies. Users don't get Linux viruses because Linux (AND GNU) is vulnerable, but because they are being stupid with a user account which has
unlimited access to the system.
I should say, that these viruses are not specific to Linux, most can "infect" BSD, Solaris etc as well.
I would like to point out this from the ClamAV website:
Clam AntiVirus is a GPL anti-virus toolkit for UNIX. The main purpose of this software is the integration with mail servers (attachment scanning). The package provides a flexible and scalable multi-threaded daemon, a command line scanner, and a tool for automatic updating via Internet. The programs are based on a shared library distributed with the Clam AntiVirus package, which you can use with your own software. Most importantly, the virus database is kept up to date .
What are those malicous attachments for? Why Windows of course.
An up to date Linux system is very secure, with systems like Debian, Ubuntu, Mandriva etc where there are a lot of contributors, and of course the entire GNU project developing the software, security vulnerabilities will be fixed at a faster rate than any worm writer.
The whole thing is akin to saying "You need to wear a seat belt while inside a tank or riot control vehicle." Obviously, a seat belt isn't going to help there. Sure, if you decelerated at a rate of 200ms^-2 from 100km/h, but what kind of stupid driver does that speed in such a vehicle?