Slashdot Mirror


Four Kids Confess to Goner Worm

imrdkl writes: "4 kids in Israel have confessed to writing and distributing the Goner worm, according to Fox." Yet another annoying worm comes and goes, wasting countless IT hours, to say nothing of bandwidth. The kids face up to five years -- of course since they aren't in the U.S., they might actually be punished.

539 comments

  1. Goners by qwerty823 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I guess they will be "goner"s real soon.

    1. Re:Goners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If only you had AC's f1rst pr0sting skillz. Looks like it's off to the dustbin of -1, Redundant for you.

  2. punishment should be... by esoteric0 · · Score: 0, Funny

    give em the chair! oh wait, just make them use microsoft products for the rest of their lives.

    1. Re:punishment should be... by Ivan+Raikov · · Score: 1

      just make them use microsoft products for the rest of their lives.

      No, that would violate the cruel and unusual punishment clause in the 8th amendment.

      :-)

    2. Re:punishment should be... by Cheetah86 · · Score: 1

      The 8th ammendment is in the US. (Hence, the US constitution) They live in Israel, so they don't have the 8th ammendment. Of course, it still could be considered cruel and unusual to have to use MS products no matter where you live.

    3. Re:punishment should be... by (startx) · · Score: 0, Redundant

      cruel and unusual punishment? on wait, they aren't in the US, go ahead!

    4. Re:punishment should be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Send them to the West Bank.

    5. Re:punishment should be... by dadragon · · Score: 1

      But....

      Cruel and unusual punisment might not be illegal in Isreal.

      --
      God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
    6. Re:punishment should be... by elem · · Score: 1

      I disagree somewhat.

      One the one hand they did do a bad thing that screwed up alot of systems, but... on the other hand they are only kids... Kids have a tendedcy to fuck up and to do things without fully thinking through the consequences. I'm sure that most people here did at least one thing that has got them in a whole heap of trouble, further more I'd bet that a fair few people here have played with cracking and/or phreaking at some point when they were kids.

      IMHO it would be better to let them off lightly and make then use their talents to do something good. A form of technical community service I guess.

      But what is most likely to happen is that they will get a slap on the wrist and then snapped up by the Israeli Army's tech/communications branch... belive me, I've seen it happen to friends of mine.

  3. US Not Punishment Friendly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >> The kids face up to five years, of course since they aren't in the US, they might actually be punished.

    Huh? The US seems to be the most "punishment-friendly" towards kids. The US is one of the only countries in the world that has put someone under 18 to death in recent years, for example.

    1. Re:US Not Punishment Friendly? by Petra · · Score: 1

      OOC who has the US put to death, that has been under the age of 18 in recent years?

      Falante Pelos Mortos

      --
      "The clay can become a bear, but not while it lays cold and wet on the riverbank." -Orson Scott Card, Children of the m
    2. Re:US Not Punishment Friendly? by scaryjohn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think taco's making a specific allusion to MafiaBoy, who got off with probation for his DDOS attack last year.

      --
      One might ask the same about birds. What ARE birds? We just don't know.
    3. Re:US Not Punishment Friendly? by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      Wasn't he Canadian?

    4. Re:US Not Punishment Friendly? by scaryjohn · · Score: 1

      He was canadian, but he was extradited... I think tried in VA Federal Court and given probation. *searches slashdot...* Eight months in a youth detention facility, and a year of probation. Not sure if it was the U.S. or Canada... but i think that's what Taco was talking about either way.

      --
      One might ask the same about birds. What ARE birds? We just don't know.
    5. Re:US Not Punishment Friendly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There have been recent cases where people have been given the death penalty for crimes that they committed whilst juveniles.

    6. Re:US Not Punishment Friendly? by dadragon · · Score: 1

      Mafiaboy is in Canada, not the US.

      --
      God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
    7. Re:US Not Punishment Friendly? by dadragon · · Score: 2

      He was tried and in Montreal, Quebec. He pleaded guilty to 56 of 66 counts of Mischief before the Quebec Youth Court. Judge Gilles Ouellet of the Youth Court heard both the Crown and defence. The other 10 charges were withdrawn.

      --
      God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
  4. Re:Wasting??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yep, you are right on the spot. *snicker* *snicker*

  5. Kids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess that Microsoft cannot pretend to be the victim of sophisticated terrorists, so no special governmental aid for them.

  6. 5 years? by Your_Mom · · Score: 2, Interesting

    After myself being called to fix a customer's sExchange (Yes, NT, I'm young and I need the money) server that barfed its guts on the floor because of this, you can hand them over to my IT dept, we really wanted to take them out back and flog them repeatedly last week.

    --
    Objects in the blog are closer then they ap
    1. Re:5 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, NT, I'm young and I need the money

      Is Slashdot now so bad that people think they need to apologize for using NT machines? The only way that phrase makes sense is in a sentence such as: "After being called in to fix a customer's septic tank (Yes, I'm young and I need the money)..."

    2. Re:5 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So somebody should be taken out and be flogged because you're young and need money? Heh. Stupid AND greedy, what a combination.

    3. Re:5 years? by Anonymous+DWord · · Score: 2

      That's what he said. Didn't you read the post?

      "...server that barfed its guts on the floor because of this..."

      --
      "If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
    4. Re:5 years? by FFFish · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I think there are a few others you should be flogging:

      Flog your users for being so fucking stupid!

      Flog Microsoft for creating such insecure software. (Why doesn't it put up bells and flashing lights when a dummy clicks an executable?!?)

      Flog the nosepickers for being such pricks. Little shits should go find something useful to do with their lives instead of pissing off the world.

      --

      --
      Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
    5. Re:5 years? by buckeyeguy · · Score: 1
      Flog your users for being so fucking stupid!
      Can't... the CEO has employed too many of his relatives for IT to get away with that one.

      Flog Microsoft for creating such insecure software.
      More like flog the old IT director for buying it.

      Flog the nosepickers for being such pricks.
      Given that they'll be in the Israeli military in their young adult years, being shot at by Palestinians and the rest of the Middle East, they'll get theirs anyway.

      OT: I've never heard our NT admin curse as much as he did this past week, when Goner came through......... He would have flogged the users.

      --
      I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
  7. Good job there by mupi · · Score: 0

    These worms are great as it allows us who work in the office (of companies that use microsoft exclusively) to have a break... Can't do much when the networks going up and down all day.

  8. they didn't do anything wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    leave the boys alone. the only people who were hurt were the people who us the defective product windows. i got the gonner a couple of times on my Linux box, big whoop. the people who opened it and spred it should be the ones getting the cops on their ass. how about M$ for making a defective product... wait, or is that a FEATURE now?

    1. Re:they didn't do anything wrong. by joel8x · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I guess you think the architects should have been held accountable for the twin towers not withstanding a plane hitting them. I hate M$'s practices as much as the next guy, but you can't hold them responsible when someone else knowingly takes advantage of a problem that they did address in hotfixes and patches! Sure it proved that there are still a lot of ignorant people out there who spread these worms, but the people who write them and send them out into the population are no better than the people stuffing Anthrax into envelopes and exploiting the U.S. postal service. These kids are electronic terrorists and we should take this offense seriously.

      --
      Sound waves should be free!
    2. Re:they didn't do anything wrong. by joel8x · · Score: 1

      "...and even i know that there is NEVER a reason to call something like this terrorism unless there was an intent to harm someone, this is nothing more than vandilism..."

      And vandalism doesn't hurt people??? You really think they had no intent to harm anyone? They obviously wanted to disrupt someones life because they did release it!! Listen, most of the people who run websites don't have their jobs just to protect themselves from "vandalists". As anyone who supports a network knows, the hours put into protecting/fixing virus and worm related issues are overtime ones that you rarely get paid proper overtime for. As I stated before, these matters need to be taken seriously.

      --
      Sound waves should be free!
    3. Re:they didn't do anything wrong. by sydneyfong · · Score: 1

      It's not the matter of who's taking all the blame or who's responsible for this. It's the matter of preventing these things from happening again. If that means sending everyone who's written one byte of virus code to jail, so be it. But it's not like if you punish these kids all the 5c1p7k1dd135 will learn the lesson not to write up a worm and releasing it without thinking. Sure some will get the general idea to be more careful and not toy with worms/viruses, but it doesn't really do much good if you send them all to jail and wreck the rest of their lives... After all, punishing does not do anyone good.

      I hate to say this, but IMHO it seems that restricting the use of the internet is a solution to these problems. By allowing immature people to use the internet, it is giving too much power to those people. It's like giving guns to kids who aren't grown up enough to know how to use it. It's like allowing 13 year olds to drive on the streets. So why do we allow 13 year old 5cr1p7k1dd135 access to millions of machines on the net? Without the issue of security problems it is absolutely fine, but with those machines sitting on the net with tons of security holes, it really is a problem.

      Not that i'm saying we should ignore security. We should, but since this is not an ideal world, security problems will and always will exist. To minimize the loss, it is feasible to at least have some control over those who should be controlled.

      Electronic terrorists? Yes take them seriously. Unarm them and they won't be terrorists anymore...

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    4. Re:they didn't do anything wrong. by autopr0n · · Score: 2

      I guess you think the architects should have been held accountable for the twin towers not withstanding a plane hitting them

      Actually the towers were designed to be able to withstand a collision with a 747 (witch is bigger then the a 767 or 757).

      So they shouldn't have fallen, what happened was totally within their design specifications. (looks like the engineers didn't count on all the burning jet fuel)

      --
      autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    5. Re:they didn't do anything wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess you think the architects should have been held accountable for the twin towers not withstanding a plane hitting them.

      No, but I would think so if it were a toy plane and there had been fifty previous examples of toy planes wrecking the same design of structure.

    6. Re:they didn't do anything wrong. by crucini · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I guess you think the architects should have been held accountable for the twin towers not withstanding a plane hitting them.

      That's a bad analogy. It's more like four kids pressed a button on the outside of the WTC at street level, causing the towers to explode due to an engineering flaw. In other words, there is no way for a mail message to directly cause harm to your computer. It must be interpreted by a program which you trust (a traitor, in other words) which is willing to harm your computer at the command of an outside party.

      I hate M$'s practices as much as the next guy, but you can't hold them responsible when someone else knowingly takes advantage of a problem that they did address in hotfixes and patches!

      I absolutely can and do hold them responsible. Their decision to facilitate running programs that arrive in the mail without any kind of sandbox or access restrictions was an obviously dangerous one whose implications were immediately visible to people who understand computers. Microsoft spins their product as the omniscient gatekeeper to the internet and handholder to the clueless. They encourage the computer-illiterate to put their trust in Microsoft rather than learning how computers actually work. They created both the software and the culture that propogate malicious code. All of which means that they are greatly to blame for deliberately bringing into existence email viruses.
    7. Re:they didn't do anything wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually no. They were designed to withstand one hit from a 707. They were NEVER designed to withstand a hit in each tower. These towers actually stood a greate deal longer than they should have. Don't get me wrong. I think that we underengeineer buildings here. We need to change how we do it. But we probably will not. And we will blame the terrorists and not the Designer/builder/Contractor/Owner the way that they should be.

    8. Re:they didn't do anything wrong. by Stonan · · Score: 0, Troll

      After hearing all of you b*tching about viruses and worms and the people who make them, I have one solution for you all:

      Switch to Linux or Unix. From what I can remember, only 2-3 virus/worms have been made for these operating systems and even then they didn't do any real damage. Why? Because the people who created Unix/Linux where driven by good programming, not the all mighty dollar.

      --
      The GEEK shall inherit the earth...
    9. Re:they didn't do anything wrong. by autopr0n · · Score: 2

      They were designed to withstand one hit from a 707. They were NEVER designed to withstand a hit in each tower

      whats the diffrenc between one hit to one hit to each tower? I mean, its still one hit/tower.

      --
      autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    10. Re:they didn't do anything wrong. by Dr.+Awktagon · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's a bad analogy. It's more like four kids pressed a button on the outside of the WTC at street level, causing the towers to explode due to an engineering flaw. In other words, there is no way for a mail message to directly cause harm to your computer. It must be interpreted by a program which you trust (a traitor, in other words) which is willing to harm your computer at the command of an outside party.

      Agreed, there should be absolutely NO REASON why a block of text and/or data sent to your machine should do anything you don't want it to. Since it does, and since these viruses get written over and over again, with no end in sight, the blame is with the software writers.

      Now I'm not saying these kids should be let off the hook. They did something that was wrong and costly. But if we don't want to have this happen again, punishing the kids accomplishes nothing. Actually it makes the future virus writers want to learn how to be more stealthy.

      The solution is sandboxes or code-checking with proofs. Or better yet, just displaying email messages as TEXT-ONLY, like they're supposed to be.

    11. Re:they didn't do anything wrong. by duffbeer703 · · Score: 2

      "They encourage the computer-illiterate to put their trust in Microsoft rather than learning how computers actually work. They created both the software and the culture that propogate malicious code. All of which means that they are greatly to blame for deliberately bringing into existence email viruses."

      Those people whom you despise are the ones who ultimately pay your salary.

      There is nothing more obnoxious than a IT person who forgets that the computers are there to drive the business, not vice-versa.

      --
      Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
  9. What drives a script kiddie? by mjed · · Score: 0

    What joy do they get out of wasting sys admins' time? Do they think that this makes them cool? What motivates these "l33t hax0rs"?

    --
    I'm a repairman in an imperfect world.
    1. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by 8bit · · Score: 1

      When I was 15 I was like that. I really don't remember why I thought that stuff was cool, it just was. Thankfully I grew out of it.

      Hmmm, maybe if there are more crackdowns on script kiddies and more slander against that kind of life these kids won't think it's 'cool' anymore. Just a thought.

      --

      --Roy
    2. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by CTho9305 · · Score: 1

      Most likely, to see if they can do it. Its really cool to watch something you make work well. They probably wrote it and didn't consider the consequences. For the first few hours, they were probably thinking, "Cool! The worm works, it spreads like it should!". Then they realized they fucked up royally and decided to turn themselves in. Good for them.

    3. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by CTho9305 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      When I was 15 I was like that. I really don't remember why I thought that stuff was cool, it just was. Thankfully I grew out of it.

      Hmmm, maybe if there are more crackdowns on script kiddies and more slander against that kind of life these kids won't think it's 'cool' anymore. Just a thought


      Same here... but I don't think crackdowns will help. I mean, they probably get enjoyment out of their creation growing (until they fully realized what they did). A better idea than crackdowns might be a controlled environment for kids to screw around in...

      Of course, one result would be giving crackes experience / promoting it. But giving out free condoms could be viewed as promoting sex...

      whatever. I can't see any especially good solution.

    4. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by OctaneZ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I disagree, these "crack downs" get media time for the kids who are writing the viruses. If anythign I think all of this media coverage glamourises the entire thing. If kids didn't see this as a way to rebel against everyone in the "mainstream" then this wouldn't be as rampant as it is. I am not saying that we should except it, and I am not saying that it wouldn't exist without the meida talking about it every 30 seconds. But what I am saying is that (Insert Anchor Man Name Here) says that this is the worst thing to ever happen, then some kid sitting there who like many of us (and I freely admit that I used to check all the boards) would look at this when they were younger just to understand it, is going to say to himself I can do better than THAT!
      Just my 2 cents.
      -OctaneZ

    5. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by CTho9305 · · Score: 1

      I don't think its really about attention, but rather seeing their work (see my other replies in this thread)

    6. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by Cheetah86 · · Score: 2, Funny

      When I was 15 I was like that. I really don't remember why I thought that stuff was cool, it just was. Thankfully I grew out of it.

      Maybe middle school/high school health classes will start having anti-lameness speeches. I can imagine it now: "Don't do worms..........mkay?" or "Don't give into the peer pressure to code worms... they might make you feel good temporarily but they're bad in the long run" or even "Just because one of your friends tells you that writing worms is cool don't listen". Lets not forget "Friends don't let friends write worms".

    7. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      It's because they're fucking JEWS! Need any further explanation?

      88

    8. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by mrseigen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, I can just imagine that, considering the constant attempts of my school board to notify everyone that they shouldn't use the heavily-monitored, automatically-admin-cc'ed email service for spreading chain letters, porn, etc. because it wastes their precious bandwidth.
      Then again, this is from the same school board that says kids can't use the comps for playing games that involve the keyboards, because they wear out quickly that way. They're only allowed to play "mouse games".
      Technology has passed these people by. Actually, I don't think we'd ever see something like this because most people I talk to think worms are caused by the Internet or something and act completely stupified when I tell them it's actual people who write them.

    9. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by Bandito · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you do any kind of programming, you should have gone through that phase when stuff like that was cool. I remember a time when I thought it would be cool to write viruses or worms. Now, the reason that I thought it would be cool escapes me.

      I believe that every programmer, at some point, goes through a phase when they want to try everything under the sun just to say that they can/could/did do it. I never actually wrote a virus myself, but I definitely remember wanting to just for the sake of getting into the guts of a computer and seeing what makes it tick.

      Most programmers have also been/are sysadmins. I believe this along with growth/maturity eventually lead to the desire to produce something useful, not destructive, for the rest of the world.

      Unfortunately, some never get past it, and some just use pre-fab virus creators. These people for whatever reason didn't move on to the next stage of evolution and probably never will, but at the same time, they keep sysadmins in business and antivirus writers employed.

    10. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by jridley · · Score: 1

      I think these kids think they're hot stuff programmers. In reality, they're using kits, and they're programmers the same way that someone who changes their own oil is an automotive engineer.

      Really, I think some of them don't intend it to go this wide, it just gets out of control. But some are probably doing it to get in the world-wide press. Some may even be trying to prove a point.

    11. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've never gone through this phase and I have several certifications to date. I always have found that 'writing virii and worms' is the lowest form of programming, and I have always looked down my nose at the mis-spent youth of these naive teenagers.

    12. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by geekster · · Score: 1

      From a technical point of view I find computer virus kinda facinating. The way they tag along some executable and spread themself to other executable. Kinda like a little life form on your computer, yeah, like a virus. But don't get me wrong, I hate virus as much as anyone else.

    13. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This comment is horrible, who the fuck could mod this as funny? Are all the moderators racist biggots? I am sickened by this!

    14. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

      Joe Sixpack:

      "Yeah my dog got worms before, them things are mean! It choked his intestinal bandwidth down pretty good and damn near shut his whole system down. If them things are on the internet too, I don't wanna touch a computer."

    15. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I thought it was pretty funny.

    16. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by OctaneZ · · Score: 2

      Oh I agree with you, I'm just saying that the media and hype around (I mean Code Red made the 6 o'clock news in the states the day it broke) creates a "competitive" climate for the virus hackers. It's a challenge. I wholey agree that they want to see if they can do it, what will happen, can they beat the last "worst virus ever" (tm), I just think that the coverage that it is given hypes it and creates a mystique.
      I'm just waiting for the next rendition of D&D/Magic/Pokemon/Fighting game to be computer viruses...

      -OZ

    17. Re:What drives a script kiddie? by duffbeer703 · · Score: 2

      How does that make them different from any perl, java or vb programmer?

      --
      Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
  10. Worms are good food. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    "Yet another annoying worm comes and goes, wasting countless IT hours, "

    This is total BS.

    I contend that these nusance worms are good for IT workers, not a waste of time:

    Worms/virusi like goner cause little actual damage, BUT they force us (and esp MS) to fix gaping security holes and enhance security policies industry wide.

  11. So? by Karma+50 · · Score: 1

    It won't make much difference whatever the punishment. Anonymity is very easy with viruses and finding out who wrote and/or released is the exception rather than the rule. There are some notable cases - Christopher Pile and David Smith for example - but they don't act as a detererent and the amount of damage (real or perceived) is greater than can be recovered from the defendent if found guilty.

    --
    http://www.thehungersite.com
    1. Re:So? by wganz · · Score: 2, Funny

      After a number of these testosterone impaired virus writers share some time with a 6'6" 300 lb lifer that thinks that they are cute; writing viruses will no longer seem so funny. If you have the bandwidth to know how to write a virus, you have the bandwidth to know it is a virtual letter bomb that hurts people. It hurts people by taking away their productive time and denying them the use of the computer equipment that they bought.

      To state the obvious, 'You f*** up, you pay up. You f*** with people, you get f***ed with.' What part of that simple truth you don't understand???

    2. Re:So? by knobmaker · · Score: 1

      You said: "After a number of these testosterone impaired virus writers share some time with a 6?6? 300 lb lifer that thinks that they are cute; writing viruses will no longer seem so funny."

      So you'd discourage script kiddies by subjecting them to repeated rape? Hey, the Taliban got nothing on you.

      The problem with your "solution" is that you start out with a self-centered, thoughtless kid, and after a couple years in the brutalizing society of prison, you end up with a seriously pissed-off, hardened criminal with computer skills and no future. If you're the one who put him in prison, you'd better start keeping your money in your mattress, because he's not going to rest until he's ruined you. And he's got the tools to do it. The motivation came from you, and your simplistic efforts to solve the problem just made it worse for all of us.

  12. Well blahs all around by GlassUser · · Score: 4, Insightful

    At work, we got it about 1100 EST. One user got it and ran it, and it cascaded. Our servers groaned for about 30 seconds, by that time, the mail admin had run into the server room and yanked the network cable to them. Honestly, I don't think the fault rests on these kids at all. Sure, I guess they should face punishment if they broke the law, but that's their country's problem. I don't blame them.

    If our users had listened to the rules, this wouldn't have been a problem. But within 30 seconds of the attachment entering our network, over 50 users had run it. Why can't someone hold the irresponsible user at fault? The instructions are easy - don't run attachments you weren't expecting. Instead of blaming some kids for playing around with code, why can't we find fault in the people that don't follow their instructions?

    Yeah, I'm ranting, but to make something constructive out of my waste of bandwidth, how can we get the users to listen? Anyone have effective tools? Yeah, I'm all for firing the ones that can't observe policy, but that would mean firing my boss too. And she's actually pretty decent, as far as managers go.

    1. Re:Well blahs all around by Karma+50 · · Score: 1

      Anyone have effective tools?

      The e500 virus scanning applicance? review

      --
      http://www.thehungersite.com
    2. Re:Well blahs all around by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 2, Troll
      "If our users had listened to the rules, this wouldn't have been a problem. But within 30 seconds of the attachment entering our network, over 50 users had run it. Why can't someone hold the irresponsible user at fault? The instructions are easy - don't run attachments you weren't expecting. Instead of blaming some kids for playing around with code, why can't we find fault in the people that don't follow their instructions?"

      Thank you for saying this. It's not the virus makers that bring down networks, it's the people who fall for the same social engineering over and over again and click on the attachment.

      I am scaring myself now because I am agreeing with the NRA - I've brought the 'guns don't kill people, people kill people' debate into this as an analogy. I apologise in advance for starting a flame war.

    3. Re:Well blahs all around by Gogl · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I agree with you, but the world doesn't.

      In fact, if users did turn smart, both you and me might find it a lot harder to get jobs.

      You see, computer geeks get jobs because we're supposed to be the ones who think about things like this. Hell, we're perverted enough to *enjoy* doing this nitty-gritty computer stuff. Joe Q. User just wants things to work. The user doesn't want to have to deal with anything. After all, the computer isn't their job, the computer is a tool to help them with their job.

      So yes, I agree that in an ideal world people wouldn't be stupid and would know not to open unexpected attachments (and always scan everything anyway, and all that stuff). But the reality of it is that will never happened, and it just takes one person screwing up to let the worm wreak some degree of havoc.

    4. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But within 30 seconds of the attachment entering our network, over 50 users had run it.

      If you have n users, you have to push the probability that a given user runs the attachment to well below 1/n to avoid being infected. Do you really think that's possible?

    5. Re:Well blahs all around by TwizzlerMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Anyone have effective tools?

      Public humiliation always worked well for me!

      e.g. "Can you believe that old pervert in sales really believed that the chick in client servce sent only him an 'I Love You' message?"

    6. Re:Well blahs all around by Ivan+Raikov · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While I wholeheartedly agree with your NRA argument, I don't think this analogy is very accurate -- you say that people who run the attachments (i.e. the victims) should be responsible; wouldn't that suggest that you want the gun shot victims to be held responsible, instead of the people who shot them?

      At any case, I do believe that virus writers should be held responsible, but I don't think the solution is the so called "cyber crime" laws or anything that focuses on the means rather than the cause.

    7. Re:Well blahs all around by giverson · · Score: 1

      Give up on the users. Just do your best to make sure the email doesn't get to them. We're a Novell/Groupwise shop, so we run Guinevere along with Norton Antivirus corporate edition. We get fixes very quickly from Symantec.

      Between that and us constantly harping about not opening unknown attachments, things are fairly safe. If there is a problem, it is contained quickly. Bottom line is redundancy. Use several different methods to prevent the initial infection.

      Oh, and not using Outlook is very helpful. The groupwise address book is quite safe, since no one uses Groupwise. Who'd write a worm that affects a only couple hundred users? ;)

      --

      Capitalism does not lead to corruption, lack of character does.
    8. Re:Well blahs all around by Sloppy · · Score: 2

      how can we get the users to listen?

      It's the answer no one wants to hear or do, but one way to get them to listen, would be to hold them responsible for their actions. You sent a dozen copies of virus? You get punished. It doesn't matter if you wrote it or not; you did it.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    9. Re:Well blahs all around by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "While I wholeheartedly agree with your NRA argument, I don't think this analogy is very accurate -- you say that people who run the attachments (i.e. the victims) should be responsible; wouldn't that suggest that you want the gun shot victims to be held responsible, instead of the people who shot them?"

      I'm saying that the worm is the gun, and clicking on the attachment is firing because it knocks the life out of the network servers.

    10. Re:Well blahs all around by spinwards · · Score: 2

      yes, but guns have other uses than to kill people. The virus was designed to be malicious. It is very much the users fault for running the worm, but the uthors should still be held accountable for releasing it.

    11. Re:Well blahs all around by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "yes, but guns have other uses than to kill people. The virus was designed to be malicious. It is very much the users fault for running the worm, but the uthors should still be held accountable for releasing it."

      Good point ... one could argue that the virus was created for the educational benefit of the creators, but overall I now tend to agree with you.

    12. Re:Well blahs all around by mce · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not just users who are stupid. I know of an admin who actually used Goner to defend the ongoing introduction of Outlook at the place where he works.

      Here's what happened: they were hit at 17:50 local time, at about 18:00, the first of four Outlook
      lusers clicked on the attachment, which made the few admins who were still at work aware of the
      problem. As they immediately went into action, they were able to get the mail servers under control pretty quickly (relatively speaking, that is). Next day, however, a scan of the network
      revealed that about 50 additional PCs had to be cleaned up. These belonged to people who still use Netscape to read their mail and had also activated the worm. It didn't spread from there, but it did disable the virusscanners, so...

      Next thing, that admin that I'm refering to claims: "Fortunately, we have Outlook installed on a few PCs already, because that is how we found out just before leaving for home. If everybody still used Netscape, a lot more PCs would have been infected during the evening, night, and morning before the helpdesk would have noticed the problem."

      Sadly, this really is a true story...

    13. Re:Well blahs all around by cymen · · Score: 2

      Why not just strip all attachments from incoming email? Or at least *.scr?

    14. Re:Well blahs all around by swimfastom · · Score: 1, Funny

      Public humiliation always worked well for me!

      This is so true. Announce that the virus is going around and that so-and-so user ran it on the PA. Employees will be scared to open anything not sent from someone they know.

      Of course, follow up by an email to everyone would be appropriate afterwards.

      --
      http://tomgould.com/
    15. Re:Well blahs all around by jmu1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Basically, it all comes down to management not taking computer security seriously. I have to deal with this sort of crap day in and day out. The folks up top decide that when something bad happens, it is my job to clean up the mess. When ever I make a suggestion, it promptly gets shot down with excuses like:"the users can't get used to that", or "that would be too much work on our part"... well, perhaps if they had to deal first hand with recovering data from virus ridden machines, they would be pitching a damn fit about it too!

    16. Re:Well blahs all around by Col.+Panic · · Score: 2
      I don't think it is too much to expect that users follow a few simple instructions when using a corporate LAN. They are required to keep their passwords private, report chain emails, not try to exceed their network privileges, and NOT OPEN UNEXPECTED ATTACHMENTS FROM PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE COMPANY.

      Since we run antivirus at our mail gateways, we catch most of what comes through and users get a scrubbed attachment of 0 bytes with an addendum to their subject line of "Scanmail has detected a virus!" so we are not usually at major risk. But we have had people (in IT even) launch iloveyou.vbs and cause headaches.

      Although I do not expect users to know which file extensions denote which type of files are attached, I do expect them to call IT before opening suspect attachments. This, of course, assumes IT has enough people to be responsive to such requests in an organization. When that is not the case, anarchy may reign...

    17. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You said it: Noone uses groupwise. We had it
      and the users kept calling down about how to configure outlook express.
      To dumb to learn to stupid to care.

    18. Re:Well blahs all around by Samuel+Hughes · · Score: 1

      yes, but guns have other uses than to kill people.

      Not handguns. Well, there's always shooting out tires and _maiming_ people, but that is still a destructive action. Rifles can be used for hunting, but pistols were invented for murder. No, seriously, that was the purpose of a handgun, back when they were invented hundreds of years ago. For shooting people.

    19. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although I do not expect users to know which file extensions denote which type of files are attached, I do expect them to call IT before opening suspect attachments.

      I'm sorry, but I don't expect anyone non-technical to know that a .XLS.LNK or a .DOC.PIF file actually executes. (I would have guessed that both were data files handled by Windows a couple years ago, when I did Windows admin).

      And you have to recall that these attachments aren't really "suspect" -- they come from somebody you know, and they could be something you expect (resume.*).

      Basically IT needs to fix this problem by GETTING SOME FUCKING BALLS and blocking attachments.

      Let's repeat this -- IT has been unwilling to do what's necessary to stop these attachments, and its time to recognize that until executables are filtered at the ingress of every network, the responsibility of these worms rests with IT.

    20. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nobody has written a virus for harvesting addresses out of an LDAP database yet.. thank God. You're right though, most people are focused on exploiting exchange and outlook and ignore most other sources.

    21. Re:Well blahs all around by slackergod · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is more like handing someone a handgrenade,
      with an attached note saying "pull this pin,"
      and that person then proceeding to pull it,
      even though they have been told OVER AND OVER
      that if they pull the pin on a hand grenade,
      it will hurt them.

      The virus is dormant, completely harmless
      UNTIL SOMEONE RUNS IT.
      The fact that someone wrote and engineered it
      to spread in this way, and convince people to run
      it, they (the writers) should be held accountable.

      But just because they are responsible doesn't
      mean every other person down the line
      isn't responsible as well.

      Makes me think of an episode of Space Ghost Coast To Coast (Snatch, I think..)
      which goes something like this:

      "The rays... Its... Its feeding on the rays!"
      "Then don't shoot it!"
      "But.. The rays... It's feeding on them! Ohh."

    22. Re:Well blahs all around by rlowe69 · · Score: 2

      If our users had listened to the rules, this wouldn't have been a problem.

      Same old argument, right? It's the user's fault.

      I really don't like this conclusion. Truth be told, this is a major security flaw in Outlook (and derivatives). The bottom line is if Microsoft is going to market to the technically ignorant, they need to protect these users from themselves for the sake of the businesses these employees work for. This is only good software engineering! Design the software for the target audience - everyone.

      Now I know MS probably doesn't think it owes the businesses that buy its software anything - "you get what you pay for". But this flaw - allowing e-mails to execute scripts - is absolutely unnecessary and costly to ANY business connected to the Internet. No amount of policy can protect businesses from this flaw. There will always been a few ignorant weak-link-in-the-chain employees that don't know any better.

      So say what you want about the virus writers, they are putting MS under a very important spotlight. How many virii have to exploit various Outlook holes before businesses demand something better, if only to save money in IT costs? It makes you wonder where the breaking point is ...

      --
      ----- rL
    23. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      swords, crossbows, mace etc. were also invented for killing/injuring.

      However, handguns can be (and most often are) used to deter or prevent crime. Nobody writes a virus/worm to prevent other viruses/worms from infecting their system.

    24. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why not just use paper and pencils. OR better yet, smoke signals.

      Honestly, slashdot posters are some of the dumbest fartknockers around.

    25. Re:Well blahs all around by cymen · · Score: 2

      why not just use paper and pencils. OR better yet, smoke signals.

      Honestly, slashdot posters are some of the dumbest fartknockers around.


      Oh yeah, definately. Sure Mr. Anonymous Coward. Do you have a valid suggestion? I can't think of anything that comes in *.scr that is of any benefit.

    26. Re:Well blahs all around by odaiwai · · Score: 2

      > Why not just strip all attachments from incoming email? Or at least *.scr?

      Because it's not a .scr, it's a .scr.pif and Windows helpfully hides the real extension from you by default.

      dave

    27. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      guns have other uses than to kill people

      Oh come on, when's the last time you used a gun for something other than killing people?

      Oops, perhaps I've said too much..

    28. Re:Well blahs all around by cymen · · Score: 2

      Well good point. But what is decent that comes in with *.pif? Again, absolutely nothing...

    29. Re:Well blahs all around by goldspider · · Score: 1
      "Honestly, I don't think the fault rests on these kids at all. Sure, I guess they should face punishment if they broke the law, but that's their country's problem. I don't blame them."

      "Instead of blaming some kids for playing around with code, why can't we find fault in the people that don't follow their instructions?"

      I'm sure I'm not the first person to refute your argument, but your thinking represents a popular sentiment of not blaming the perpetrators who committed the act. Rather you would punish those who did not prevent the act, despite their ignorance.

      Using your logic, you would not punish the Columbine shooters (had they not killed themselves) because school officials weren't aware that they were about to snap.

      You can't wholly blame unsuspecting workers for opening an innocent-looking attachment. Sure, they shouldn't open unexpected attachments, but you have to understand that many of these people assume that the virus protection software on their machine will (go figure) catch viruses.

      We have to keep focused on who knowingly created the problem, not those who unwittingly perpetuated it.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    30. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Out of the millions and millions of users of MS Outlook, how many of them have an ACTUAL F***ING NEED for the built-in Visual Basic scripting?

      Microsoft is so stupid, they need to at least detach the scripting so that it is an optional install.

    31. Re:Well blahs all around by SilentChris · · Score: 2
      Any admin worth his salt wouldn't have allowed the "running" of attachments on the clients in the first place. That's more a client-side issue than anything else.

      Also, blocking most attachments, if not all, at the mail server would've stopped the problem complem.

    32. Re:Well blahs all around by PurpleBob · · Score: 2

      and NOT OPEN UNEXPECTED ATTACHMENTS FROM PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE COMPANY.

      That's not good enough. After the first one, the rest of the unexpected attachments would be coming from people INSIDE the company.

      --
      Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
    33. Re:Well blahs all around by PurpleBob · · Score: 2

      No, it really is a .scr. Screensavers are executable files in Windows.

      --
      Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
    34. Re:Well blahs all around by kz45 · · Score: 0

      and NOT OPEN UNEXPECTED ATTACHMENTS FROM PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE COMPANY

      doesn't always work, the bad trans virus (I think this is one of them) will infect your system through a flaw in outlook, by just viewing the message.

    35. Re:Well blahs all around by Glytch · · Score: 2

      Tell your managers about how much it costs, instead of just how much effort it takes. Be sure to factor in your own pay, it makes the numbers bigger. Managers don't understand much, but they do understand money.

    36. Re:Well blahs all around by ncoder · · Score: 1
      The spreading of the first e-mail virus was the virus writer's fault.

      The spreading of the subsequent e-mail viruses is the users fault.

    37. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      However, handguns can be (and most often are) used to deter or prevent crime

      Hahahaha! ONLY an American would utter something that incredibly stupid. Yee-haw, Yankee!

    38. Re:Well blahs all around by CokeBear · · Score: 2

      The spreading of the first and all subsequent email virii is the fault of the company that wrote such an easily infected email program.

      --
      Reality has a liberal bias
    39. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There will always been a few ignorant weak-link-in-the-chain employees that don't know any better.

      There will also be a few ignorant traditional top executives who don't respect the new kid on the block -- the CIO. They think physical and legal security are hot stuff, but data security is just a few technical tweaks, ergo no bux available.

    40. Re:Well blahs all around by autopr0n · · Score: 2, Insightful

      yes, but guns have other uses than to kill people.

      Um, guns may have other usages, like scaring people into thinking you might kill them. And killing large animals. But they were designed for the sole purpose of killing people

      --
      autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    41. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know at my company we can strip attachments once it's known they're a problem. How about taking a hash of each incoming (and possibly outgoing) attachment and tallying them. I'm assuming once one has been opened, there's a snowball of outgoing stuff generated.

      If there's a sudden spike in either direction, based on normal patterns, blow out a HOLD IT RIGHT THERE note to everyone to alert staff there may be a problem. Then start stripping attachments which match the hash pattern.

      This won't stop everything, but it may minimize problems and provide an earlier warning than we now have.

    42. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >However, handguns can be (and most often are) used to deter or prevent crime.

      Through the threat or action of murder.

      I fail to see the point.

    43. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >guns have other uses than to kill people.

      Yeah! You can open your beer, turn off your lights, change the channel on TV, and scare your wife all at the same time (if you're a good shot!).

      Tell me, other than threatening to kill things, or actually killing, or destroying property, what is the other purpose of a gun?

    44. Re:Well blahs all around by Mike1024 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hey,

      Honestly, I don't think the fault rests on these kids at all.

      A quick article reference:

      Once inside a user's system, it [Goner] deletes anti-virus and firewall programs, then installs scripts to allow hackers to access the computer and use it as a platform for denial-of-service attacks.

      This was not a blameless accident. It wasn't a mistake, that wasn't meant to be released. It was a specially written virus designed to build a 5cr1p7 k1d33 DDOS network.

      I don't think they planned to sit around with thier massive DDOS network, not doing anything. Furthermore, they certainly knew what trouble the worm could cause - there is ample precedent for this.

      We won't deter future virus writers with a slap on the wrist. They need to be given a sentance that others will look at and say 'I wouldn't want that to happen to me'.

      They shouldn't be given a 5-year sentancem granted. I would think that a $5,000 fine and confiscation of thier computer equiptment would to fine. But we can't say 'Blame the users; they aren't following procedure', because if it weren't for script kiddie virus writers, there would be no need for virus-stopping procedures at all.

      That's my opinion, anyway.

      Michael

      --
      "Goodness me, how unlike the FBI to abuse the trust of the American public." -- The Onion
    45. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, viruses have the positive purpose of driving up the cost of ownership of Windows installations and discrediting M$ security culture.
      There is actually a direct analogy to the 2nd Amendment there -- the little buggers really serve "the security of a free State" ;-)
      (...but contrary to you I don't agree free armsbearing does that any more.)

    46. Re:Well blahs all around by staeci · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      hmmmmm, I wonder if the City of Largo had any problems with this? Or am I just adding insult to injury? ;-)

      --
      'Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson...'
    47. Re:Well blahs all around by Jburkholder · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of that tv spot. Joe the IT manager is shon interacting with his users and their managers throughout the day.

      "Joe, I sent you an email telling you that the email is down!"

      "Joe, I opened that email virus, just like you told us not to."

      "Looks like another all-nighter, eh Joe?"

      Point is, non-technical users will always do stupid things. I've seen places attempt to make people accountable for their actions by documenting specific policies, and then threating diciplinary action if those policies are violated.

      Thing is, you'd end up firing 1/2 the staff if you let go anyone caught opening "I Love You". I know most IT people would not shed a tear if 1/2 the lusers got let go, the the reality is that it is expensive to replace people. Firing a few people over spreading an email virus would probably cost the company tens of thousands by the time you add up the lost productivity, training the new hires, the overhead it takes HR and the manager to screen, interview and hire new employees.

      From my perspective, I think you could make a case that in the long run this would save the company money, but in reality I think companies just won't do this. Last time we actually fired someone for violating company policy, he was misappropriating company resources by hijacking a machine and setting it up as a personal web server and he was writing a worm. You gotta really go out of your way to get fired by doing something blatant and intentionally damaging. Clicking on an email attachment is just dumb.

    48. Re:Well blahs all around by SCHecklerX · · Score: 2
      Right.

      So since you can't fix the clueless people, make them use software that doesn't allow it to happen in the first place. Problem solved.

    49. Re:Well blahs all around by artemis67 · · Score: 2

      They shouldn't be given a 5-year sentance, granted. I would think that a $5,000 fine and confiscation of thier computer equiptment would do fine.

      Nope, wouldn't do a thing. Their parents would pay the fine and they would find another computer to use.

      The only deterrent kids would be worried about is incarceration, because mommie and daddy can't fix that for them.

      5 years is a lot, but I wouldn't give them less than 1 year. I think 2 years is the optimal number.

      -----

    50. Re:Well blahs all around by dittrich · · Score: 1

      $5000 fine PLUS

      Take them, their computer, safety glasses, & a baseball bat. Lock them in a room. They can't leave the room until the computer is destroyed.

      For some added punishment, tape the destruction and make them watch it a few times...

    51. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe IT should give all their users Netscape. That would eliminate well over half the viruses that enter through e-mail. Granted, attachments that are opened are still problems, but macro viruses are eliminated.

    52. Re:Well blahs all around by davidarcher2000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      At my company, we've implemented a mail filtering system (with procmail) that automatically mangles certain "dangerous" extensions. This way, the user can't just open the attachment directly, but instead must save it someone on their hard drive, rename it, and THEN run it. These extra steps usually make them give pause to the fact that MAYBE they really shouldn't be opening this attachment if they don't know who's sending them it. Also, they get to see the whole name of it when they are opening it since alot of mail clients will cut off the extension and just show "..." at the end if the filename is too long. We've just implemented this about 3 weeks ago and although we were physically sent the Goner worm, no one actually ran it because e-mail alerts had already been issued and because of the filtering at the server level.

    53. Re:Well blahs all around by Vagary · · Score: 1

      It's generally agreed that the problem is that attachments are too easy to run. And people who know only run attachments they were expecting. So why not force users to specify when they expect an attachment? Here's how it should work:

      1. If the message has an attachment, the server grabs it and appends a notice to the message.
      2. The user sees this notice, and loads some app, webpage, or e-mail to retrieve their attachment.
      3. The server sends them their attachment with a warning.

      The attachment retrieval service will already be account-based, so it will be easy to make it act differently for each account. Then you can put users into categories based on their history: if a user opens a bad attachment they go on probation and have a waiting period for future attachments. If they do it consistently, they're not allowed to get their attachments until an administrator has examined it (at eir leisure).

    54. Re:Well blahs all around by itarget · · Score: 1

      Forcing people to educate themselves and be vigilant is a nice sentiment, but you can't ignore the fact that those kids are the ones who commited the crime and created the malicious code. They are the ones at fault.

      While flaws in security and human judgement are a shame, exploiting them to do harm is illegal.
      It would be nice if these flaws could be corrected or avoided by replacing faulty products but for the most part that's not an option for many people thanks to MS' monopoly, which is also illegal... but that's not the crime in question, so I digress.

      --

      "Where shall the word be found, where will the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence." -T.S. Eliot
    55. Re:Well blahs all around by GlassUser · · Score: 2

      Someone targeting the ten thousand employees at my company's parent. We're the only branch that uses Exchange, everyone else fell into the groupwise thing.

    56. Re:Well blahs all around by GlassUser · · Score: 2

      Um executing an executable is a flaw in your email client? You realize that you don't even have to have email for this worm to infect and damage your system, right?

    57. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2 "engineers" (it support), 2 days @ 40/hr = $1280
      128 employyes, 15 minutes @ 40/hr = $1280
      1000 employees, 15 minutes @ 40/hr = $10000

    58. Re:Well blahs all around by Col.+Panic · · Score: 2
      I don't expect anyone non-technical to know that a .XLS.LNK or a .DOC.PIF file actually executes

      Oh, neither do I. I have made sure everyone in IT who launched iloveyou knows the difference, but as for the business employees - I won't bother wasting my breath.

      GETTING SOME FUCKING BALLS and blocking attachments

      Not even remotely practical. With over 70,000 employees all around the world, you just cannot deny attachments - no one could work. The only solution is to scan attachments. I am not a mail admin, so I don't know details, but we occasionally experience lagtime of upto several hours in email from outside the company. This is very painful to live with, but I don't see an alternative. I would rather err on the side of safety than have to clean up the mess on thousands of clients after the fact.

    59. Re:Well blahs all around by Col.+Panic · · Score: 1

      We get around this by not using Outlook for email :)

    60. Re:Well blahs all around by rlowe69 · · Score: 2

      You realize that you don't even have to have email for this worm to infect and damage your system, right?

      Aren't you just splitting hairs? Receiving vbscript/outlook virii in e-mail (through Outlook) is the most common way and it's also, by far, the fastest method of distribution of these virii.

      You could go around with a floppy disk and distribute it that way, but ... someone could follow behind you with their own disk installing the patches at the same speed. :P

      Regardless, it's the fact that Outlook transforms normally benign e-mail attachments into executable virus scripts that is the problem. Bottom line.

      --
      ----- rL
    61. Re:Well blahs all around by Sethb · · Score: 2

      Another helpful tip, and one that saves us TONS of work as IT staff, is to disable active scripting on the Windows computers that your users use. We have a line in our Netware login scripts that does just this. It disables all the visual basic script stuff, thereby reducing most of the worms to harmless text files. I've never once had a user notice, and have a reason to use Visual Basic scripts....

      We use that, in conjunction with Norton AntiVirus Corporate Edition, and some diligence on my part in grabbing the newest definitions as soon as a big worm spreads, and we haven't even had to physically visit one of our 350 computers since May due to a virus/worm infestation.

      Oh, and Outlook/Outlook Express is fine, if you take the time to set your users up so they cant open executable attachments. Blame the IT support staff in places that have them. I don't know who to blame when it comes to home users, but having a copy of Norton Antivirus 2002, which updates automatically every 4 hours, will go a LONG ways to stopping most of these things within the first 24 hours...

      --
      When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout. --Robert A. Heinlein
    62. Re:Well blahs all around by psych031337 · · Score: 2
      Yeah, I'm ranting, but to make something constructive out of my waste of bandwidth, how can we get the users to listen? Anyone have effective tools?


      Get your OK from management to make each and everyone pay 5 or 10 bucks for each occasion he/she fucks up by running a unexpected attachment. Make clear that this is mandatory. Make clear that you talking about the dangers of attachments is taken for real. And maybe conduct "drills" as someone pointed out a few posts back in this thread. (Drill being an selfwritten vbscript that does not have malicious code and is sent to emails at your company. When executed it just fires off an email to you/IT management and notifies the user that he has done some bad that might have cost him a days work if it was a serious, real worm)
      --
      +++ath0
    63. Re:Well blahs all around by Balp · · Score: 1

      1000 employees, 2 days lost work @ 40/hr = 640000

      Or a lost contract some more dollars, the need is a good risk summary and a note of the costs.

    64. Re:Well blahs all around by bpowell423 · · Score: 1

      Honestly, that's a little lame. Guns, I'm sure, were designed with food in mind as much as keeping bandits away. Yes, a lot of guns get used for killing people, but that doesn't make guns bad, just the people using them. Baseball bats don't kill people, people kill people. Ban baseball!!!

    65. Re:Well blahs all around by Nikau · · Score: 1

      Or if you prefer an Open Source, route there's always MIMEDefang...

      --
      There is no escape from The Muffin.
    66. Re:Well blahs all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, blocking most attachments, if not all, at the mail server would've stopped the problem complem.

      This is true in the same way that shooting people who have migraines cures the headache.

      Attachments suck. They are tools of the devil and no right-thinking person would use them. Sadly, though, there are precious few right-thinking people in the business world, and so it is left to IT to try to deal with the mess.

      What I really think is that a lot of people posting snide little messages about not letting users run attachments is that they're too stupid to come up with a better solution and put it into place.

    67. Re:Well blahs all around by Ionized · · Score: 1

      the mail program isn't getting infected. the user's computer is. all outlook does is make it easy for them to execute attachments. it's still the users fault for being too goddamned stupid to realize they shouldn't open unexpected/suspect attachments.

      "The spreading of the first and all subsequent anthrax mail virii is the fault of the company that designed such an easily infected mail delivery service."

      doesnt that look pretty stupid? now explain why your statement is any different.

    68. Re:Well blahs all around by CokeBear · · Score: 2

      It

      --
      Reality has a liberal bias
    69. Re:Well blahs all around by CokeBear · · Score: 2
      It is different because Microsoft's email client is the *only* one that propegates these virii. Eudora, Pine, kmail, any others you can name... none of them pass along email viruses.

      It is different. email is not snail mail. Its a bad analogy.

      --
      Reality has a liberal bias
    70. Re:Well blahs all around by clubin · · Score: 1

      Do you also blame the receivers of anthrax mailings?

    71. Re:Well blahs all around by jmu1 · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, I work for the Government. They really don't care how much it costs. As a matter of fact, I was sitting in on a meeting recently that the basis of which was to figure out how to spend more money so that we would be allotted more money next fiscal year... ever wonder why taxes keep getting higher? But, for now, it is a job... being young and inexperianced sucks to no end...

    72. Re:Well blahs all around by Ionized · · Score: 1

      so if i am sent the "snow white and the seven dwarves... the TRUE story!" message and open it in eudora, and then double click on the attachment, i won't get infected? amazing!

      your only valid argument is a case where outlook is set up to automatically execute script attachments. and this argument is a half-assed one, because anyone with half a brain should know to disable this feature. it's not rocket science.

      do you blame redhat if your linux box gets r00ted by a 2-year old buffer overrun? no? then explain why this is different. if you don't patch, you suffer the consequences, regardless of what software you run.

  13. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  14. What's the point? by macemoneta · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Children do what children do; push buttons to establish limits. That's their job. Punish the managers and complacent sysadmins at the companies impacted, that allowed themselves to get a year behind on maintenance. There will always be children. We don't always have to be cheap/lazy about security. At least not if we're going to bitch and moan about stuff that's completely preventable.

    --

    Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

    1. Re:What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if kids know that they could be come ass candy for some inmate or even better... worm food at a young age, then maybe they'll think twice about doing this shit. We don't run any M$ servers at the ISP I work at yet we were still hit because of traffic caused by this worm. How do we recoupe the costs associated with this?

    2. Re:What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear ass,
      Not everybody has the privileges of your upbringing, some of us work with people who don't care because
      there are no consequences and the IT staff is
      one guy for 200+ hosts.
      Thats shitty reality in k12, try it.

  15. Same old... by powerlinekid · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ok heres the basic cycle:

    script kiddie/cracker/whatever create worm

    worm gets out, spreading by point and click method

    IT goes on about how bad this one is

    Eventually worm dies and kids are caught

    Big deal made over last worm causes more copycat type worms

    Cycle restarts

    Ok I mean thats pretty general, but goddamn if I'm not sick of all this. How about instead of going after the worm writers (they are not innocent but hear me out), why don't we try to at least educate the public into not opening things they don't know about. I mean what good does blackice and zonealarm do if someone opens a file and turns them off? The technology isn't the problem (except with IIS but thats whole different beast), its the people. Maybe someone (I know I'll be flamed as a bastard for this) should create a worm that actually fucks over the people that open it. Instead of making it so they download some roll-back registry fix, how about you just wipe out the registry? Why not make it so IE and Outlook have popup-adds with every page and email they view. What if the worm steals their emails and sends them to spammers list automatically? I mean obviously people aren't learning, or this crap wouldn't be happening over and over again. Yeah the people are victims blah blah blah... cry me a river. I've never had a worm, and never will. I'm not claming i'm smart or anything, but its common sense that an emailing "I'm asking for your advice" with a document that ends in scr or vbs is something that joe45@aol.com probably didn't mean to send me.

    --

    can't sleep slashdot will eat me
    1. Re:Same old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Uh huh.

      So when your grandmother's house gets burgled, because she went down to the shops with the back door still open (tsk, tsk... dementia)... then the cops should come over, beat her up, and steal anything that's left, just so that she will learn not to leave the back door open?

      Could work. Would be nicer if granny could visit the shops relatively sure that people weren't going to burgle her house, though. Or, better still, if granny could rely on those better equipped to protect her from these nasty intrusions. She'd never learn though, and that might be dissatisfying.

    2. Re:Same old... by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "I mean obviously people aren't learning, or this crap wouldn't be happening over and over again."

      It's possible that someone's brought the point that I'm about to mention up before:

      Maybe we should make some really nasty social engineering worm with proper english and a truly tantalizing premise for opening the attachment. And when they open it, the thing will send itself out and then overwrite the windows registry, kill off the person's partition table, FAT, etc. That will make them remember to be careful of attachments and teach them a lesson.

      You can tell a kid not to touch the oven many times, but until they do it and get their finger burned, they probably won't remember the lesson.

    3. Re:Same old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A better message might be, "write something destructive, go to jail." Stop the problem at the source.

    4. Re:Same old... by netsharc · · Score: 0
      Although I agree with the idea somewhat, the ones that end up getting screwed by it would be the sysadmins, as many among us would agree. What about a worm that searches for Office documents and delete them? That would teach the luser. Of course unless they're in a good shop that has backups, then the sysadmin would have to suffer.


      What about a worm with CIH's payload.. fuck the BIOS.. that would really teach people. Or would they ever learn anyway? That would really cost billions in computer replacement and lost work (and not just half a day because of a downed server, imagine how long it would take if suddenly say 100,000 computers had to be replaced at once?), and the person who writes would be someone who doesn't care much for his life anymore, because he'd spend the rest of it in jail.

      --
      What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
    5. Re:Same old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't Sircam try to do this by e-mailing out contents of your "My Documents" folder for other people to read.

    6. Re:Same old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know a lot of people with that story. They used to be script kiddies, and now that they're older, they're just as incompetent, but they think they're better now.

      Its hardly news, but if someone in the 'security community' starts talking about their skills ("I know 234034 languages!") you know their making shit up again. Pathalogical liars, all of them ("We can take down the internet with just one packet!").

    7. Re:Same old... by Mr+Spot · · Score: 1

      There are already worms that do that sort of stuff, one example being W32.Magistr. Apart from the proper english, it sounded like it does what you want it to. e.g. it overwrites the boot sector of the first IDE hard drive, erases the CMOS, flashes the BIOS, corrupts/deletes text files, and much more. Plus it can send itself to people in the victim's Outlook, Netscape and (in the newer version, which is linked) Eudora address books. Too bad it is old and the virus scanners can detect it.

      --

      Sigmenation fault.

    8. Re:Same old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So we really go after the worm writers?

      I can't think of any that have been severely punished for the damage they've caused.

      I thought we tried to start "educating the public" long ago, and it doesn't seem to be working. Maybe we need to make an example of one of these kids.

    9. Re:Same old... by Glytch · · Score: 2

      Actually, a better house analogy would be the story of the three little pigs. The first little company made their email client out of straw...

    10. Re:Same old... by Glytch · · Score: 2, Troll

      Excellent point! After all, cracking down on drugs with harsh laws has made the drug trade stop.

    11. Re:Same old... by Croaker · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Why not make it so IE and Outlook have popup-adds with every page and email they view. What if the worm steals their emails and sends them to spammers list automatically? I mean obviously people aren't learning, or this crap wouldn't be happening over and over again. Yeah the people are victims blah blah blah... cry me a river.

      Ah yes. It's the user's fault. Damn them for actually using the features in their frigging e-mail clients. How dare they not go through arcane menu commands and figure out how to deactivate features. Let's shoot the slobs now, and totally ignore the fact that lazy-ass developers created all of these problems for the users to begin with.

      I've never had a worm, and never will. I'm not claming i'm smart or anything, but its common sense that an emailing "I'm asking for your advice" with a document that ends in scr or vbs is something that joe45@aol.com probably didn't mean to send me.

      Oh yeah. very common sense. Unless, perhaps you know joe45@aol.com. Which is the case in most of these "scan the user's address book and send a copy" schemes. That's why it's so successful... e-mails go to people who know, and perhaps trust, the person who launched the virus. Hell, a lot of the viruses are in the form of Word documents, which, believe it or not, are actually passed around via e-mail. See, e-mail is all about communication. People send people things. People open them up. 99.99% of the time, nothing bad happens. That's what e-mail is for. That's why we have attachments. If people aren't supposed to open them, what's the point of having that capability in e-mail clients?

      Do you actually expect people to know what the hell a .scr file is? Maybe you've got all of Window's file extensions memorized. Most people I know have more important things to think about.

      No, if you want to code up a virus to "fix" this problem, code up one that goes out and downloads and installs an e-mail client that was written by someone with a clue about security. Perhaps install an operating system where something run in userland can't fuck with system files. Hell, write a virus with some AI that can seek out and destroy the source code to lousy e-mail clients, scripting systems that have no concept of security, and operating systems that have no security model to speak of.

      In the mean time, screeching at people that doing things that the e-mail clients were designed to do in the first place is grounds for a cyber-anal-raping is about as productive as screeching that they're a witch if they float in water. It may seem obvious to you, but you're not speaking their language.

    12. Re:Same old... by GreatUnknown · · Score: 1

      Do you actually expect people to know what the hell a .scr file is?

      No, but they probably should know that a Word document ends with .doc (seeing as they send them around so much), and know what the other normal extensions are. If you don't recognise it, don't open it.

    13. Re:Same old... by powerlinekid · · Score: 2

      The thing about common sense is that you need to make it common to people. Nobody is born with it. How do you learn the common sense not to stick your hand in fire? By burning yourself at one point or another. With that in mind, by educating the public that is what I mean. Let them know that there really is no reason to open a file ending in .vbs or .src from people. The reason these worms spread so well is that they rely on ignorance of people. Get rid of that ignorance and you've gotten rid of the worms. As for sending word documents... how many word documents have you ever received that ended in .scr or .vbs? Considering that .doc has been the defacto extension for a word document for probably a decade, its just dumb to think that anything that said .doc.src was a word document. By default Outlook doesn't launch worms when it receives them. I've received countless worms in a default outlook setting and not once was one run. So I wouldn't go blaming Microsoft for that. People don't want to use any other email clients, because there really is no point. Netscape's sucks. Mozilla's is based off of netscape's. We're talking people that aren't going to use Evolution or Kmail. Maybe someone should write a worm that actually makes people more aware of worms in general, not just specifically.

      --

      can't sleep slashdot will eat me
    14. Re:Same old... by ElAurian · · Score: 1

      It's all very well to say that someone should create a truly damaging worm that fucks over the user's system, but you're too late.

      I foolishly opened an email attachment a week ago, which seemed totally legit because it mentioned specific information known only by a member of the family.

      This bastard turned out to be a trojan that, after 48 hours of slowdowns and constant hard-drive noise, which I could not isolate the cause of, simply wiped out 99% of my files, which were not backed up because I couldn't afford it.

      I'm a writer, and as you can imagine, losing my work like that brought up true feelings of hatred towards the virus creator.

      My point is that such a worm would likely be more trouble than it's worth.

    15. Re:Same old... by pjrc · · Score: 2
      ... why don't we try to at least educate the public into not opening things they don't know about ...

      If you could "change the world" somehow, it'd be a lot simpler to just edit the client software or even add filtering at all the mail servers to delete all executable attachments before the user ever has an opportunity to execute them.

      There really isn't any compelling reason for people to distribute software via email attachments. It is rarely done, and it's very unsafe.

    16. Re:Same old... by palfreman · · Score: 1

      I'm not particularly sympathetic. As a writer, your words are your primary asset. If you aren't backing up everything you produce on a daily basis you are a fool. Text and word processed documents take relatively little space, and no matter how poor you are, floppy disks are extremely cheap. They may be low quality, but rotating the disks and saving to hard disk too should give you all the redundancy and role-back you need for very little cost or difficulty. Personally, I use (UNIX) tar backup script direct to multiple CD-Rs. But that is optomised for effort rather than safety, as my data is unlikely to be as valuable to me as a professional writer's is to himself.

    17. Re:Same old... by Plebis · · Score: 0

      Ah yes. It's the user's fault. Damn them for actually using the features in their frigging e-mail clients.

      Of course it's the users fault. Everything is the users fault.

      --
      "Dude, pounds are so metric, fuck that." - Noah
    18. Re:Same old... by Windrip · · Score: 1
      It astonishes me that the same people on the Making Linux look harder than it is thread who whine and mope that users are too frigging stoopid to read manuals are bitching and moaning about users who actually use their e-mail client.

      Croaker has it right: the /. community really raises the bar on hypocritical speech.

    19. Re:Same old... by bpowell423 · · Score: 1

      Sure there is. We have some customized software, written by an outside source, running in a lab. When they need to send an update, they email it to us. Sure, there are other ways to do it, but saying there isn't any compelling reason for people to distribute software via email attachments is sort of like saying there isn't any compelling reason for people to send email at all. I mean, after all, there are other ways to communicate!

    20. Re:Same old... by SaXisT4LiF · · Score: 1

      "No, if you want to code up a virus to "fix" this problem, code up one that goes out and downloads and installs an e-mail client that was written by someone with a clue about security. Perhaps install an operating system where something run in userland can't fuck with system files. Hell, write a virus with some AI that can seek out and destroy the source code to lousy e-mail clients, scripting systems that have no concept of security, and operating systems that have no security model to speak of."

      I think this is a great idea... write a worm that deletes windows and replaces it with a secure OS. Now, if we just had a superior OS to replace it with...

      --
      Fight or flight its all the same
      Live to die another day

      --Ryan
  16. punishment for virus writers? by Krimsen · · Score: 2

    Do you guys really think virus writers should be punished? I hate to sound old (I'm only 23), but we've had viruses for years before the internet was as commonplace as it is now and no one cared. You just restored from backup and went on. Am I wrong here? I see jailtime for virus writers as being a little too extreme. Yes i know of the Robert Morris worm back in the day and yes, he ended up getting probation, etc, but for the most part, no one payed viruses the attention they are getting now.

    1. Re:punishment for virus writers? by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      I think one of the biggest differences between when you and I were younger and the internet wasn't as big then (when most people had no internet access then) was that a lot of average people weren't using computers as much as they are today.

    2. Re:punishment for virus writers? by brood · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I hate to sound old (I'm only 23), but we've had viruses for years before the internet was as commonplace as it is now and no one cared.

      You just made your own point. The internet is now commonplace, and it costs large corporations lots of money in lost productivity when one of these get sent out (if only in our IT department alone, laughing at the stupidity of the users falling for the stupid tricks the virus writers use to get them to open the email). There are a hell of a lot more people to care now.

    3. Re:punishment for virus writers? by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "Do you guys really think virus writers should be punished? I hate to sound old (I'm only 23), but we've had viruses for years before the internet was as commonplace as it is now and no one cared. You just restored from backup and went on. Am I wrong here? I see jailtime for virus writers as being a little too extreme."

      We all pine for the 'old days.' But really ... today all they have to do is relate it to 'terrorism' somehow and then the person goes to jail. And then all virus makers are terrorists. And because the terms are generalised, anyone who is a 'hacker' is a terrorist. But wait, there are many linux hackers who don't go around compromising networks. But they are hackers. Sooner or later a linux hacker or two get identified with working on PGP, but strong encryption, according to the US, is a munition - WE HAVE HACKERS MAKING MUNITIONS HERE!! TERRORISTS !!! Arrest them ALL!!! They're helping Osama Bin Laden! And it could all be falling into a cascading cycle of ignroance.

      And this is what THEY want because people with outside-the-box knowledge about computer security can always do things with networks that can't be controlled or monitored by the powers that be.

      Ah yes, I pine for the good old days. (Btw, if it means anything, I'm younger than you.)

    4. Re:punishment for virus writers? by nomadic · · Score: 2

      I don't think they should go to jail, I just think someone should smack the stupid out of them.

    5. Re:punishment for virus writers? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2
      ...for the most part, no one payed viruses the attention they are getting now.

      That's because in those days, viruses did relatively little damage to only a few people. There weren't as many around, and it was much harder to spread them.

      Nowadays, a s'kiddie with a problem can do millions of dollars' worth of damage because he's in a bad mood, and he can do it in a matter of minutes. No matter how good your security and recovery procedures are, a virus can always hit at the wrong time and do serious damage. Remember, a single day of downtime or an afternoon of lost data across a whole company can be the difference between making a profit or going bust in this business.

      So yes, I think you have to punish those who do this, and with something serious enough to act as a genuine deterrent. Slapping them on the wrist and saying "Naughty" just isn't sending the right message.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    6. Re:punishment for virus writers? by gers0667 · · Score: 1

      I like virii actually. When nimda hit, i got to work 28 straight. Then 13 the next day and 4 on saturday. My overtime pay was enormous. I've gotta pay the college bills some how.

    7. Re:punishment for virus writers? by sigwinch · · Score: 2
      Nowadays, a s'kiddie with a problem can do millions of dollars' worth of damage because he's in a bad mood, and he can do it in a matter of minutes. No matter how good your security and recovery procedures are, a virus can always hit at the wrong time and do serious damage.
      True, but there are billions of people out there and a significant fraction of them cannot be deterred except by killing them. They might be crazy, they might want to bring down the techno-societies, they might not care what happens to them, whatever. Such people are inevitable, so you have to regard them as a force of nature and work around them. Any system that assumes they don't exist, or assumes that they can be deterred, will certainly fail.
      Slapping them on the wrist and saying "Naughty" just isn't sending the right message.
      OTOH, deterrence and punishment are almost completely futile from a strategic point of view. Deterrence is never perfect, and it only takes one undeterred person to bring down the system. The solutions are better technology and better user training.

      Look at it from a warfare angle: Goner is a half-assed stunt by some *Israeli* kids. You can rest assured that if Al Qaeda could find two brain cells to rub together that they would've done something similar, and unlike the kiddies they would've wiped BIOSes and NIC MAC addresses, wiped filesystem metadata and boot sectors, programmed video cards to extremely high refresh rates (destroying old monitors and maybe making them catch on fire), and so forth.

      --

      --
      Kuro5hin.org: where the good times never end. ;-)

    8. Re:punishment for virus writers? by stpats · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Are you serious? Viruses/Worms today have the capability of disrupting economies all over the globe. They can cause millions to billions worth of dollars in lost productivity. Who are these crazy people who blame the users and think the authors are practically blameless? The users end up invoking the malicious program, but that's akin to a "clever" a-hole sending a well disguised letter/package bomb to someone with the return address of a friend and then blaming the recipient when they open the letter and it blows them up. Except that the person who's blown up would somehow also be sending letter bombs to every one they kept in contact with.

      For everyone that thinks it's all about ignorance, here's to hoping you never get yours and end up somewhere on the globe where it's legal to sodomize random people. You're going to get it in the end.

    9. Re:punishment for virus writers? by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      I don't think they should go to jail, I just think someone should smack the stupid out of them.
      Don't worry. When they'll get in jail, they'll get their stupid smaked out of them.

      Through their anuses.

    10. Re:punishment for virus writers? by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      ...
      You can rest assured that if Al Qaeda could find two brain cells to rub together that they would've done something similar
      ...
      But they DID!. Wrecking billions of dollars ' worth of prime real-estate with only a few box cutters and the like is pure genius. Now, Ossama Bin-Laden truly showed his engineering talent: doing a lot with virtualy nothing.
    11. Re:punishment for virus writers? by sigwinch · · Score: 2
      But they DID!. Wrecking billions of dollars ' worth of prime real-estate with only a few box cutters and the like is pure genius.
      I was thinking along the lines of causing grave strategic injury to the U.S. The 9-11 attacks were tactically brilliant, but strategically ineffectual. The U.S. could withstand an attack of that magnitude once a month indefinitely. A successful cyberspace attack every month, however, would destroy the economy within a year, and all it takes is one bright kid.

      BTW, Al Qaeda did not accomplish the attacks with "a few boxcutters". They accomplished it with applied psychology. The critical point of the 9-11 strategy was convincing several hundred people to sit on their hands while their planes were turned into missiles. The coming cyberspace attacks will probably use similar social engineering techniques to trick people into working for the attackers to violate security isolation.

      --

      --
      Kuro5hin.org: where the good times never end. ;-)

    12. Re:punishment for virus writers? by gdr · · Score: 1
      The 9-11 attacks were tactically brilliant, but strategically ineffectual. The U.S. could withstand an attack of that magnitude once a month indefinitely.
      Imagine that every month somewhere in the US a large office block was destroyed, people would be afraid to go to work. Imagine that every month an airplane (or three) were brought down, people would be afraid to fly. The Sept 11th attacks did not have a disasterous affect on the US economy because we believe further attacks of this magnitude are preventable. If people thought that they could not be protected from further attacks there would be widespred panic.

      That's why they call it terrorism.

  17. They've already suffered enough by cperciva · · Score: 3, Troll

    I, for one, think that they've already suffered enough.

    After all, judging by the virus code, it is almost certain that they had to use Microsoft software to create it.

    1. Re:They've already suffered enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lolloilo llollo lo l : ))) OGM. LOL

  18. Not to state the obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You'd be way better off filtering any attachments that have a .scr or .vbs extension-- right at the mail server.

    1. Re:Not to state the obvious by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2
      You'd be way better off filtering any attachments that have a .scr or .vbs extension-- right at the mail server.

      At first sight, that sounds like a great solution. In fact, MS themselves tried it (blocking just about anything that might be executable, without any chance to circumvent the block) in the notorious Office security patch a few months ago. Unfortunately, that immediately caused chaos in offices across the globe, as people suddenly discovered that they couldn't send or receive attachments they actually needed to any more, either.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    2. Re:Not to state the obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Well, doesn't that just prove that you guys really are the computer janitors?

      "Don't open executables morons", you guys snicker, "(except when you need to, which is all the time ... Yes ma'm, I'll be right over there to fix your computer, lickity-split)"

    3. Re:Not to state the obvious by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2
      "Don't open executables morons", you guys snicker, "(except when you need to, which is all the time ... Yes ma'm, I'll be right over there to fix your computer, lickity-split)"

      Well, that's kinda the point. People do need to send attachments, end of story. (OK, OK, that's not strictly true, but the hassle in using the alternatives would be too much for the average user.) All these people who run around saying "Competent sysadmins would disable it completely..." or other such rubbish have either never been a competent sysadmin or have been lucky enough to work in a company whose day-to-day business does not depend on these technologies. Most sysadmins are not that lucky.

      OTOH, attachments are potentially dangerous. They are necessary, but caution is required also. The only solution to this is effective user education. As has been noted many times before, you cannot fix a sociological problem with a technological solution. To that end, I personally believe that blanket security restrictions and such are counterproductive; your users will simply learn to stop them, or complain until you are forced to remove them, because they can't do their jobs. Much better to illustrate, vividly but discreetly, the dangers they are ignoring, until they get the point. Restrict blanket bans to those who've demonstrated that no other way will suffice, and you'll keep more friends among your user base.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    4. Re:Not to state the obvious by w1kL3f · · Score: 0

      What about people sending attachments when they should be using plaintext?

      I'm sick and tired of looking at how much bandwidth I see wasted on the mailserver here by people opening MSWord attachments telling them they didn't get a Job Somewhere Else.

      Why would anyone send a message consisting of "Thank you for applying, after a review of your experience and credentials, blah blah blah" as an attachment???

      Fingers are pointing everywhere, but it'll end up being a war between sysads and lusers unless we ALL take the view that it starts with us. So don't attach some bloat when you could just send text.

    5. Re:Not to state the obvious by LarryArmstrong · · Score: 1

      I agree. There is no goo reason for the average user to receive .vbs and .scr e-mails at work.

      I've set our av program to automatically put those kinds of attachments into quarantine.

    6. Re:Not to state the obvious by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2

      .vbs and .scr files are fair enough. The problem is, how long do you make the list? Will you also ban .exe? What about .zip, which could contain anything?

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    7. Re:Not to state the obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here at work, that's what they do! They filter all executables from attachments, even digging into zip files to kill them. Our filter actually looks at the contents of the files, too, so if you're trying to get a ligitimate executable through, renaming it won't help. It took half a dozen tries with a vendor a few weeks ago to get a file through, and a couple of calls to the MIS dept. Sadly, they weren't checking .SCR files, so we got hit by goner, which took down our email AND OUR PHONE SYSTEM! Seems the phone is running on ethernet down at HQ...

      The solution would be really simple... for Outlook to only allow you to save attachments. Then it's a two step process. Save the attachment, then go find it and execute it. Face it, most of the people who propagate these "viruses" don't know enough to go find the file once they save it off. That way people who need to send attachments can do it, but we don't waste time and money cleaning up after the idiots.

      .02

  19. Nothing but terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another front emerges on the war on terrorism, lawyers expect the military tribunal to start shortly. The defendants are believed to live a stones (or missile guided bombs) throw of Afghanistan, which gives us a tolerance of 1200 miles.

  20. Why is this such a problem? by Pyromage · · Score: 0

    How many worms/viruses/etc has that been that have been dropping servers like flies across the world in the last 6 months? The last year? Why don't we do something about it? It isn't like the technology isn't there, but at the very least, the technology exists to filter almost all this, if it's known. And they become known pretty fast, as we've seen. Why not an RBL-type authority, where it can be automatic? Provide a database of traits of known bad emails, and just drop them. We keep having our servers hammered by this, but it's entirely unnecessary. But no one seems to LEARN! How many times before little teenie-boppers have to whack you over the head with the anvil that these damned worms is before something is done? This is insane: we can fix it, but no one has done a damned thing to date.

    1. Re:Why is this such a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The technology existed for decades, in the form of mail clients that didn't execute code. People, for whatever reason, decided to downgrade to pre-1970s technology. And now you propose a technological fix? don't you get it? People hate technology! That's why they use Microsoft products.

  21. He'll be OK by theKiyote · · Score: 1

    actually, since they arnt in the us, their punsihment will probably be lighter. Remember the kid in canida who took out ebay, yahoo, and various other e-retailers? he only got a couple months. If the us is involved, they classify it as terrarisom and hunt his little behind down. --theKiyote

    1. Re:He'll be OK by D43m0n_C0d3r · · Score: 0

      "kid in canida " Canada... It's not all that hard to spell, you fscking redneck.

      --
      ^_^x
    2. Re:He'll be OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it was kinda cute
      I always put "Canadia" whenever I fill out applications or forms

    3. Re:He'll be OK by james_masters · · Score: 1

      Learn how to spell.

    4. Re:He'll be OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Proof that even JeffK posts to slashdot!

      My god, man. Learn to spell!

    5. Re:He'll be OK by theKiyote · · Score: 1

      Im sorry. Ill check my spelling next time. I just was a little quick with the keyboard --theKiyote

  22. 5 years for kids??? by datawar · · Score: 3, Flamebait

    I'm a kid (Senior in High School...) and I've seen kids to stupid things (I've done some stupid things myself too). These things should NOT be punishable by 5 years (unless they are violent). Kids are kids, and then they grow. Putting them in jail for years on end isn't going to make them grow up any faster.

    In the US, these same kids can just as easily steal a car, get drunk, and run you over while running a red light. Guess what? With a good plea-bargain, they'll get off in 5 years too.

    What's more important, 5 years in the slammer for stupidity or 5 years in the slammer for killing someone? Get your priorities straight people...

    1. Re:5 years for kids??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I think you miss the point of why jail time is an effective deterrent to crime of all types. It not only punishes the guilty, it can also keep the innocent from becoming the guilty. Without stiff punishment there is no deterrent effect to their peers. If you think there may actually be a chance of something bad happening to you for doing something wrong, you are less likely to do it (unless you're an idiot of course).

    2. Re:5 years for kids??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what these kids did is worse than killing people. They embarrassed and humiliated people. Instead of killing someone, they did the equivalent of snailmailing out boxes to people, where the boxes contained a loaded gun and a note saying "Instructions: Point at your head and pull trigger." When it turned out that people followed the instructions, it was very embarrassing. They made top people look stupid! This cannot be tolerated.

    3. Re:5 years for kids??? by gowmc · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I totally agree with you on this one. But I will just go one step further. I think we should implement cruel, and maybe some unusual punishments for this as well. Maybe like removing the top halves of peoples fingers when they do this instead of jail. Same to them blasted J-walkers!!!

      --
      -- If it aint broke, fix it till it is. --
    4. Re:5 years for kids??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it cuts down on viruses these leet kiddiez
      can rot in jail for 5 years.

      They'll just get out and get jobs as programmers making 70K, no harm done.

    5. Re:5 years for kids??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on..

      Everyone learns at an early age what is right, or what is wrong. These kids knew what they did was wrong... they know the punishment for they did... still they took their chances and got caught. Time to pay the price.

      As it was mentioned earlier, since they are not in the United States, there is a good chance that they will be punished. If it was here, all they would get is a slap on the wrist and maybe some community service.

    6. Re:5 years for kids??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is, of course, a considerable difference between J-walking and a malicious attempt to destroy someone else's property, wether they are successful of not. Even though I block executable attachments at our mail server I still lost several hours fielding phone calls from users who got the alerts from the filtering software. Most of them called before they read the message I had sent out telling everyone what was going on because they didn't want to open anything without checking with me first!

    7. Re:5 years for kids??? by Carbon+Unit+549 · · Score: 1

      If they were in China they would be executed. Ahhh now there's a warm and fuzzy feeling...oh, but I digress. The point is, you play, you pay, time to grow up.

      --

      nohup rm -rf ~/. >& zen &

    8. Re:5 years for kids??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you deliberatly set out to run down and kill someone, in which case there is premeditation and you are looking at 20 to life... Intent plays a large part in the law.

    9. Re:5 years for kids??? by Blue+Smoke+Generator · · Score: 1

      I think you are right. They don't need jail time, they probably just need to pay back some of the damages they caused.
      I think when I was a kid and I broke a window or did some damage to someone elses property. My parents where usually expected to pay for damages. Perhaps that that is the solution? Hmm... How much do you think that would be, Millions? Billions?
      I also don't think that blaming the user isn't the answer to this. People should be alowed to carry out thier pursuit of happiness, Life and liberty and all that in relative safety. The police don't expect you to protect yourselves from
      murderers, thieves, and other criminals, why should we as Infomation Technology People (The regulators and protectors of information) expect our charges (users) to protect themselves???

    10. Re:5 years for kids??? by fliplap · · Score: 1
      5 years is a good number, maybe a perfect number. For crimes of this nature, the amount of jail time is directly related to the amount of damage caused, and the cost to clean up that damage. I think for every hour of every sysadmin and user time lost in cleaning this up, they should rot in jail for an hour.

      On top of that, these kids don't make the kind of money a sysadmin makes, an hour of thier life is actually much less valuble than that of a sysadmin. When someone wastes an hour of your life wouldn't you want to waste an hour of thiers?

      And yeah kid do get drunk and hit people with cars, but chances are they didn't WANT to hit you with a car. In this case they WANTED to cause damage, they wanted to take away other people's time, the only intent of this was todo harm. For that there should be a severe punishment.


      This isn't a matter of setting an example, its about punishing someone that did wrong

    11. Re:5 years for kids??? by KidIcarus · · Score: 1

      >It not only punishes the guilty, it can also
      >keep the innocent from becoming the guilty.
      >Without stiff punishment there is no deterrent
      >effect to their peers. If you think there may
      >actually be a chance of something bad happening
      >to you for doing something wrong, you are less
      >likely to do it (unless you're an idiot of
      >course).

      Of course, criminals are bascially either idiots or forced into their crimes through social and psychological forces outside their control. The detterent argument doesn't hold water. Nobody commits a crime because they're thinking "When I get caught, the punishment is pretty light". They're usually either not thinking (crimes of passion) or they're thinking "I'll never get caught..."

      If strong punishments were an effective detterent, far fewer murders would be commited in those states with the death penalty, but statistically this is not the case.

      In a more general sense, too, you have to consider whether the criminal justice system exists to punish criminals, or to reform them. The popular view these days is that if we just punish the criminals hard enough, crime will go away. This is basically a bullshit attitude though. In order to reduce crime one needs to analyze and correct the psychological, social, and economic conditions that give rise to it. The way jails are these days, people are more psychologically fucked-up coming out of them then they were going in. Because of that, we'd be better off locking everyone in for life, rather than letting them out after a specified period of time, pretending that somehow they were reformed by the experience, and then acting surprised at the extremely high rate of recidivism. Let's say these kids were American. Shoving them in some juvenille institution, or worse yet trying them as adults (they're terrorists after all, under the draconian laws we have now) for 5 years wouldn't help anything. They're not going to come out of that experience as productive members of society. The mental, physical, and sexual abuse they'd experience would mean that they'd come out of jail far more dangerous to society then they were when they went in. Putting kids in with hardened criminals is no way to reform them.

    12. Re:5 years for kids??? by Tardigrade · · Score: 2, Interesting

      One fewer murder was committed in Florida a few years back because of the punishment if caught. I know this because I was the person who meditated on it, and decided not to go through with it.

    13. Re:5 years for kids??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If strong punishments were an effective detterent, far fewer murders would be commited in those states with the death penalty, but statistically this is not the case.

      That is based on the hypothesis that being killed is worse that spending life in prison.

    14. Re:5 years for kids??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make choices. Accept the consequences. Change the things you don't like. That's life. And as long as you can understand that, you are an adult.

      How weird. I can't be the only one who noticed the little mot at the bottom of today's page, which reads: Turn the other cheek. -- Jesus Christ

    15. Re:5 years for kids??? by hughk · · Score: 2
      My own little company is quite tight, but this one definitely hit our ISP very badly and caused all kinds of problems with Email delay. This is a bad thing. This has cost a lot of people a lot of money. Nobody was killed but a lot of people were hurt. This sounds like terrorism to me.

      In Israel, they generally shoot terrorists (and one or two innocent people). I don't want the death penalty for these kids but five-years would be about right.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    16. Re:5 years for kids??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "make choices, accept the concequences", honestly you make me wanna puke. You sound like a government produced home-life program from the sixties.

      You know what 5 years is for an 18 year old? He'll be 23 and feel like 43 inside, having lost his best years just because he lives in a paranoid country that can't differenciate between real vicousness and young people making a mistake.

      "cause harm to organizations and individuals" sheesh, businesses are not the owners of the net, in a sane world it's for anyone doing anything they want to do. "Billions in damage" what a joke, in who's eyes? Virtual money in a virtual world, where does it leave the poor dying on the streets? "Sorry sir, you cannot be allowed to die as a dog, we suspect you of creating a "symphatey" virus that make our clean and morally supreme people feel for dogs like you. Good heavens!

    17. Re:5 years for kids??? by DrSpin · · Score: 1
      Why punish them? What is wrong with asking them to provide compensation for the loss they have caused?

      Oh, its $600,000,000,000.

      Ok, let them be punished. Lets be lenient - If they would have got a year for each bank they robbed, well give them one millisecond for every server they paralysed. OOps - thats a lot more than 5 years!

      Or we could give them community service - lets employ them to provide DOS attacks on ISPs who permit their systems to be used for spam.

    18. Re:5 years for kids??? by snol · · Score: 1

      yes, 31 billion servers is a drop in the bucket against the havoc these kids caused....

      do the math

    19. Re:5 years for kids??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Couldn't agree with you more. Fuckers like this are the reason for most of the illnest in our society today.

    20. Re:5 years for kids??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, you'll get about 5 million people in prison (as opposed to 2m), but hey, you'll get your revenge.

      Why even have a court of law? Let's just let a lynch mob carry out the revenge. That'll show them to break the law.

    21. Re:5 years for kids??? by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1, Troll
      In Israel, they generally shoot terrorists (and one or two innocent people). I don't want the death penalty for these kids but five-years would be about right.
      They're jews. And they've inflicted untold economic harm onto goys. As a result, they won't get anything, as it is well known that jews don't like goys.
    22. Re:5 years for kids??? by Rande · · Score: 1
      The police don't expect you to protect yourselves from
      murderers, thieves, and other criminals, why should we as Infomation Technology People (The regulators and protectors of information) expect our charges (users) to protect themselves???


      Um, so you are saying that the police should stop people who receive a gun in the mail from shooting everyone in their office and then shooting themselves in the foot? The criminal only sent them the gun...the user didn't have to pull the frigging trigger!

    23. Re:5 years for kids??? by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      I agree.

      Even if the damage these script kiddies caused was to major companies that could afford the losses, it is still theft. They weren't after bread or medicine, they were fscking up systems for fun.

      Prison can't be about rehabilitation or reeducation. Why? Because in order for effective changes to be made, you need to use torture and brainwashing. It serves one purpose, and that is 'eye for an eye'.

      I'm disappointed by the people that think the kids should be let free. If they were smart enough to write the virus they had to know what it would do. Some of the blame goes to Microsoft for prioritizing ease of use over security. Some of it goes to users that opened the attachments. But neither Microsoft's mistakes nor user mistakes would be an issue if there was no virus.

  23. We should harness the talents of 5cRi7K1DDI35 by el'gwato · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Instead of being punished (in the usual way) for this annoying act of internet vandalism the Israeli government should make them pay for their crimes in a way that will harness their talents. Maybe some form of Internet good will, like 2 years doing mindless computer support for a charity organisation.
    These kids are to young to go to gaol and the outcome of confining the kids to a cell for up to five years will only make them criminals.
    I just think the punishment should fit the crime and actually make a difference to the outcome of such young and talented delinquents lives :)

    --
    All speling, factual, tact, and/or grametical errers be the result of netwerk interpherance or# transmition ererrs.
    1. Re:We should harness the talents of 5cRi7K1DDI35 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better yet, they should be inducted into the Mossad and taught how to write real computer viruses.

    2. Re:We should harness the talents of 5cRi7K1DDI35 by el'gwato · · Score: 0

      The HORRER, oh THE HORRER!
      I think two years supporting an NT4 System on a network of 300+ Win98 boxes none of which are patched, throw in an MS Exchange server and let them see the error in their ways first hand... and if it helps charity as well!

      --
      All speling, factual, tact, and/or grametical errers be the result of netwerk interpherance or# transmition ererrs.
    3. Re:We should harness the talents of 5cRi7K1DDI35 by ThatComputerGuy · · Score: 2

      The SPELLING, oh the SPELLING is a HORROR!

      I mean, damn...

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    4. Re:We should harness the talents of 5cRi7K1DDI35 by onesandzeros · · Score: 1

      in Australian English, and maybe other dialects as well, jail is gaol, and I think tire (on the car at least) is tyre. Watch the first Mad Max movie, there's a garage in it somewhere that says 'tyres' or something on it.

  24. Re:GPL: Intellectual Protection or Intellectual Th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if it's for INTERNAL use only. why would you have to give the source out? and to WHO? you're not DISTRIBUTING anything to ANYONE outside your company. what am i missing?

    i hate to start calling names, but sometimes you just gotta call names.

    you're stupid, and you should stick to M$ windows.

  25. punishment for goner perps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    have these morons not learned anything from current events around the world? it just isn't cool to do damage to others. it seems that because networks are "soft" targets, where the damage isn't measured in human terms, that people like this are allowed to get off pretty easy. time to toughen up a bit and help them understand that the rest of us have the right to NOT be f'd with.

  26. Sigh... by RelliK · · Score: 3

    Well, we all know that most organizations' security is so pathetic that any teenager can write a worm to penetrate it. Once again, we have the living proof of that. Once again, everyone blames "evil hackers" instead of addressing the real problem or even so much as hinting that sysadmins, or beter yet, PHBs should take part of the blame. So, what else is new?

    BTW, I've read that in Israel white-collar crimes are punished more harshly than normal crimes. For example, if you commit copyright infringment you stand to spend more time in jail than a rapist. Can somebody confirm/deny this? (But then again, it looks like this is the way things are going in the US too with "hackers" being declared terrorists and all...).

    --
    ___
    If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
    1. Re:Sigh... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      Really? I've heard that software piracy is absolutely rampant in Israel, placing it in a similar position as a number of SE Asian countries.

      I have some relatives over there... I'll have to ask the next time I get a chance.

      Personally, while I agree that the authors deserve the most blame, the programmers who construct systems so fragile that they can be affected by these things don't exactly smell like roses. Security models that don't date back to the 60's would be a good start. ACL has _long_ gone out of date, but the morons keep on using it.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    2. Re:Sigh... by Angry+Black+Man · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >>BTW, I've read that in Israel white-collar crimes are punished more harshly than normal crimes. For example, if you commit copyright infringment you stand to spend more time in jail than a rapist. Can somebody confirm/deny this? (But then again, it looks like this is the way things are going in the US too with "hackers" being declared terrorists and all...).

      No, no, no. After living in Israel for about a year, I can tell you that copyright infringement (especially cable/sattelite/software piracy) run rampant. I'd say around 80% of all software was pirated, and most people I knew stole either sattelite or cable television. In a country that's at war, piracy isn't the current priority on the ethics hierarchy.

      --
      the byproduct of years of oppression by the white man
    3. Re:Sigh... by gutigre · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Israel's been continually at war for so long that anything not related to bombs in Jerusalem or the anthrax missiles from Iraq is basically ignored. So organized crime, software prostitution, and software piracy all tend to flourish.

    4. Re:Sigh... by Bastian · · Score: 2

      Once again, everyone blames "evil hackers" instead of addressing the real problem or even so much as hinting that sysadmins, or beter yet, PHBs should take part of the blame. So, what else is new?

      Sysadmins and PHBs? Where I work, sysadmins and PHBs are probably the only people working to stop the viruses - and believe me, if we could get away with doing the things we want to do to stop them, we would. We already virus scan everything that comes through email, and we've gone so far as to create worms that search peoples' computers for viruses and sends a message to a server to shut off that computer's port when one is found. We remove MSIE and Outlook from all computers, actively discourage their use, and the helpdesk answers all questions related to the two with, "Get Netscape and then we'll talk."

      And despite all this, we got hit hard by Code Red and have been trying for months to get all traces of w32.nimda cleared off the network. Problem is, no matter how much we deprecate as much unsafe software as we can, no matter how much we repeat things like, "don't open unexpected attatchments" at workshops, people still do all the krap we tell them not to do, and have more excuses for why they do it than I care to mention.

      If we had our way, we would probably have blocked every kind of attatchment from *.mp3 to *.doc by now.

      We can sit and whine about script kiddies and place the blame on them, but that won't ever solve the problem. People will always pull shenanigans because they can. We can blame stupid users, but if there's one thing I've learned from mopping up other peoples' shit, it's that people will always do dumb things.

      As far as I'm concerned, there's really only one place we can have much of an affect on this problem, and it is the companies that make software. It's a bit like the problem of auto accidents - you can sit and blame drunks and bad drivers, but the only way you're going to save lives is by imposing safety standards on the automobile industry. Similarly, the only way we're going to fix the problem of viruses is by having some sort of accountability process for companies. I can understand not holding the company accountable when an exploit involves using some obscure bug in the program - we can't reasonably expect bugs to never occur in programs. We can hold companies accountable for idiotic things that nobody should do in commercial software, such as 8-bit XOR encrypting passwords - one of the things that nimda exploited to be able to spread across Microsoft networks so easily.

  27. I can't belive people are still falling for this! by bnavarro · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's like that TV Commercial that's been playing in the States here:

    *Woman peeks her head into IT Manager's office*
    "Oh, and Bob, I opened that e-mail virus -- just like you told me not to!"

  28. Moderation does work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amazing... A troll account, and just about every single one of your posts is rated -1. If I didn't know better, I'd bet you were one of the Slashcoders testing the moderation concept.

  29. you reap what you so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    buy using ms

  30. Fixing the staff problem by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't agree entirely with what you write, since I assign the blame for things like this almost entirely to those who write the stuff in the first place. I'm sure you'll get plenty of other replies saying the same.

    OTOH, you make a fair point about employee training. The small company where I work, a software development house, has had a few e-mail viruses mailed to it over the past year or two. It's interesting to note that these often get forwarded around the office, but invariably by non-technical staff. The developers and tech support guys and gals generally have the sense not to run blind attachments; the admin and management guys and gals are more trusting, and bite the bullet.

    Our IT support guys have long had a record kept of exactly when everyone runs the anti-virus update they mail round every month. Recently, they've instituted a "leader board", which is mailed to everyone, showing who ran it fastest. It's an amusing little game for those of us who are sitting in front of our PCs anyway, but the really telling thing is the people who don't appear on the list at all (which is typically mailed around the afternoon after the update), i.e., those people who still haven't updated their systems several hours later. Guess who they are...

    So, we have established that certain types of users are more vulnerable to this than others, and we know who they are. The next question, of course, is what to do about it. You can come up with any number of penalties, but how are you going to turn around and slap them on, say, the MD of your company (a repeated offender in our case)?

    Personally, I always liked the "drill" approach. The IT guys occasionally create a Hotmail account or some such, and mail something cool-looking to a few random accounts at the company. If you run the attachment, it pops up a simple message on your screen informing you that if this had been real, you'd just have cost everyone in the company a day's work/sent abusive mail to your most profitable client/whatever. This isn't publicly embarassing, and it makes the point. It's certainly proven very successful in a couple of cases I know of.

    You could complement that with a "three strikes" sort of rule. Anyone who falls for it gets a couple more spams shortly thereafter. Anyone who falls for it repeatedly has maximum security settings imposed on their machine thereafter. It will cause them hassle if, for example, they have to send or receive a genuine executable attachment, but such is the price you pay for keeping your systems secure from your own users as well as people outside. Better that than watching offensive mail go to those top five clients...

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    1. Re:Fixing the staff problem by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

      Yeah, or you could find out who started propagating (sp?) it and lock their email. Send them one message that says 'you screwed up, BIG TIME. please report to your manager (admin, whoever) to restore email services.'

      When they show up, give them your lecture, a swat on the knuckles with a ruler, and tell them to have a nice day. Tell them if they do it again in the future, they'll be denied mail usage permanently. Whether or not you actually enforce that rule is irrelevant. It'll scare them enough to make them think twice.

      Mainly this comes down to email clients. Don't use vulnerable software and you won't have to deal with this.

    2. Re:Fixing the staff problem by mce · · Score: 1

      Telling them that their e-mail access will be cut off does not help if they are the CxO (for some random x). Of course, if it's the CIO ...

    3. Re:Fixing the staff problem by Typingsux · · Score: 4, Redundant
      Well....

      At least in my company, the first person to send this out (company name to remain anonymous.) was the CTO

      This is not a lie or an exaggeration. Our companies CTO was the first damn fool to send it.

      I'll now read the rest of this thread to see other replies.

      --
      The above post is an editorial, the poster cannot and will not be held responsible for all or in part for it's contents
    4. Re:Fixing the staff problem by jrwillis · · Score: 1

      Tell them if they do it again in the future, they'll be denied mail usage permanently.

      This doesn't seem to be much of a threat to me. Hell, if it wasn't for e-mail I might actually get some work done from time to time. :)

      --
      Keep Austin Weird!
    5. Re:Fixing the staff problem by (H)elix1 · · Score: 2

      Ya, ya... I'm scanning a box now because I had a shared drive that just popped up as being infected.

      We use outlook - but mine was patched and I used the web client via mozilla to avoid the vbscript, IIS disabled and using something else for a local JSP/HTTP server. I thought I was being carefull, and I still got nailed by nimda anyhow...

      Your drill only works for the first case. From there on out, it sends it to every one in the address book. I get a message from the CTO, rather than 1337hxrs@hotmail.com, that is a known source for me. Your lucky most email virus subjects lines are stupid too - unless the damn preview nails you anyhow. Ah, hell... even when I was practicing safe hex, the only thing left standing was my sunblade.

      BTW, the preview problem can be fixed for those of us forced to use outlook... Check out nohtml. http://ntbugtraq.ntadvice.com/default.asp?sid=1&pi d=55&did=38

    6. Re:Fixing the staff problem by QuickFox · · Score: 1

      ...the anti-virus update they mail round every month.

      Er... would that be an attachment? Hey, I know a script kiddie who'd love to work at your company!

      Give a man a fish and you have fed him for one day. Teach him how to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime. And he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fish.

      --
      Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
    7. Re:Fixing the staff problem by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

      Ehh, this doesn't apply to you. You're reading /. so you must have some concept of security :)

    8. Re:Fixing the staff problem by Karma+50 · · Score: 1

      You're reading /. so you must have some concept of security

      That's the same /. with the uncrackable, https based login system, right?

      --
      http://www.thehungersite.com
    9. Re:Fixing the staff problem by RollingThunder · · Score: 2

      As UserFriendly recently put it... that's the "Chief Take-the-blame Officer". Sounds like this one's on the ball!

    10. Re:Fixing the staff problem by wampus · · Score: 1

      The difference is, when slashdot gets cracked, no one really cares, cause the comments are all thats here, and they are 90% crap. Thats like not locking up your outhouse, sure they can get in there, but its nothing but shit in a hole!

    11. Re:Fixing the staff problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A software development house that updates its virus scanner *once every month* and does so by sending it around by e-mail for voluntary installation????????
      Boy, what a mess....

    12. Re:Fixing the staff problem by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2

      That's one level of the AV protection in place, yes. Obviously there are others as well.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    13. Re:Fixing the staff problem by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2
      ...the anti-virus update they mail round every month.
      Er... would that be an attachment? Hey, I know a script kiddie who'd love to work at your company!

      Sorry, forgot the "irony" smiley... :-)

      (But actually, no, it's a text link to a batch file on our server in a standard place.)

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    14. Re:Fixing the staff problem by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      I don't agree entirely with what you write, since I assign the blame for things like this almost entirely to those who write the stuff in the first place. I'm sure you'll get plenty of other replies saying the same.
      The best "disclaimer" I ever heard was from a former roommate, when he tried to justify throwing some of my stuff in the garbage (for him, a book that is older than a year is obsolete):
      I want't my fault, it was by brain!!!!
    15. Re:Fixing the staff problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow that is a stupid idea.

    16. Re:Fixing the staff problem by Dubber · · Score: 1

      Why do the users have to run the update in the first place?
      We run {not a plug, just info about a reliable source} TrendMicro OfficeScan (ya ya, an M$ shop, do with what you've got) which has the option to alert the clients that a new pattern file/scan engine/etc is available and should be downloaded.
      No end-luser involvement. As soon as I hear about a new baddie (either via /. or Trend's email alert or bugtraq or wherever) I'm updating from their site and not bothering my users with all the nitpicky $#|+ about updates -- they've got enough to think about (either whatever it is they're getting paid for or getting more pr0n - ha, as if)

      --
      Your complaints about being offended offend me.
    17. Re:Fixing the staff problem by Staciebeth · · Score: 1

      We're too small to have a CTO, but the Tech Manager was the only person to open "I Love You" when that went around my company.

      And he gets a door and a window. Life is SO unfair.

  31. Attachment blocking at the server by bubblegoose · · Score: 5, Informative

    This virus wasted about 5 minutes of my time. I read an article about what it did, then the next day I deleted about 150 copies of this that got quarantined on our company's Exchange server.

    I use a virus scanner on the Exchange server capable of blocking attachments based on extension (Scanmail by TrendMicro works nicely for me). I always block:
    ade,adp,asx,bas,bat,chm,cmd,com,cpl,crt,exe,hlp, ht a,inf,ins,isp,js,jse,lnk,mdb,mde,msc,msi,msp,mst,p cd,pif,reg,scr,sct,shs,url,vb,vbe,vbs,wsc,wsf,wsh

    Bingo - no e-mail virus problems :)

    I figure if my users really need them and the person sending the message is smart enough (and meant to send it) then they can zip it. If the sender wasn't smart enough to zip it, then I can always pull it out of the quarantine folder.

    --
    I hope that someday we will be able to put away our fears and prejudices and just laugh at people. - Jack Handey
    1. Re:Attachment blocking at the server by NotoriousQ · · Score: 1

      All nice and well, till someone sends a word virus. -- I did not see .doc on that list. Same with the pdf virus, which caused havoc on javascript enabled acrobats at my work.
      In other words, you are not safe till you block all mail attachments, unless the applications are written with protections in mind

      --
      badness 10000
    2. Re:Attachment blocking at the server by bubblegoose · · Score: 1

      OK I guess I could amend what I said.

      I run Scanmail on my Exchange server. The virus definitions get updated daily. I thought this was good enough, then "I Love You" hit us. I had gotten my updates that morning before the vendor had issued a fix for it.

      Blocking the attachments by extension and not blocking .doc and .xls was a conscious decision on my part. It gives me piece of mind that I'll block most of the viruses before a definition is issued. No one even notices the attachment types that I block, and they seem to be the easiest ones to exploit.

      --
      I hope that someday we will be able to put away our fears and prejudices and just laugh at people. - Jack Handey
    3. Re:Attachment blocking at the server by WzDD · · Score: 1

      >Scanmail by TrendMicro works nicely for me

      Can you get it to stop spewing email everywhere? I'm hoping this is a configurable option, but at least some idiot sysadmins set that program to send email to the *recipient* (rather than the sender or the admin) when it finds a virus-infected mail. Which is just great when that recipient's a high-volume mailing list...

    4. Re:Attachment blocking at the server by Nishi-no-wan · · Score: 1
      I figure if my users really need them and the person sending the message is smart enough (and meant to send it) then they can zip it.

      I figure that that'll work great until some script kiddie decides to zip their mail (attachments).

    5. Re:Attachment blocking at the server by el+borak · · Score: 1
      I always block: ade,adp,asx,bas,bat,chm,cmd,com,cpl,crt,exe,hlp,ht ,a,inf,ins,isp,js,jse,lnk,mdb,mde,msc,msi,msp,mst, p,cd,pif,reg,scr,sct,shs,url,vb,vbe,vbs,wsc,wsf,ws h

      So what's your company? I want to send some .pl files your way... or was it .class?

      --
      An imperfect plan executed violently is far superior to a perfect plan. -- George Patton
    6. Re:Attachment blocking at the server by Marcelo+Cid · · Score: 1

      Ok, the next worm will have a zip built-in.

    7. Re:Attachment blocking at the server by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      I always block: ade, adp, asx, bas, bat, chm, cmd, com, cpl, crt, exe, hlp, ht a, inf, ins, isp, js, jse, lnk, mdb, mde, msc, msi, msp, mst, p cd, pif, reg, scr, sct, shs, url, vb, vbe, vbs, wsc, wsf, wsh
      Might as well list what you don't block, it will be faster... (I wonder if you cut-and-pasted that list straight off your server's config...)
    8. Re:Attachment blocking at the server by ruvreve · · Score: 1

      I work at a company that does the exact same thing. Not only do they block attachments that are potentially dangerous but they get daily updates from numerous servers with new virus info. They also run updated virus scanners on each of the desktops. We decided that we would rather manually retrieve any attachments that users need then spend an entire weekend trying to clean out the exchange server and users desktops each time another kid wanted to kick microsoft in the junk.

    9. Re:Attachment blocking at the server by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also don't see that you block for the email body itself - the most dangerous viruses/worms that I've seen so far execute when the user reads the e-mail.

      I've read a lot of posts in this list saying that the end user should be smart enough to not open attachments - I've got news for you - that is not sufficient to prevent a worm from spreading in an MS environment.

      I didn't think that a developer would be stupid enough to enable scripting inside email (or an untrusted web page for that matter) to access system resources or execute programs, but Microsoft again shows me how wrong you can be when you assume there are limits on things such as stupidity.

      The best part of the the whole thing is that MS claims that IE5.5 is patched to not allow this type of attach - I personally was attacked on a fully patched Win2K box w/ IE5.5. Even better, I can't apply the patch, because the installer says I don't need it. I love those guys in Redmond.

  32. fuck you taco by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    before someone decides to punish morons
    who publish libelous incorrect information
    on a 'news' site.

  33. Re:at least IT is paid by the hour. by Publicus · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I wish I had mod points. (+1, insightful)

    --

    My Karma was at 49, then they switched to words. All that work for nothing!

  34. This Is Bullshit by Lethyos · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The kids face up to five years, of course since they aren't in the US, they might actually be punished.

    Computer crimes are MORE than sufficiently punished in the US, thank you very much. I don't know where you get off implying that the US goes easy on computer "crime". I had a little incident during my freshman year of college. The FBI was very determined to get me jail time for a ridiculously minor offense. It was only through sheer wit and creativity of my laywers that we got the offense down to a misdemeanor and a lousy 600$US fine. That was the most hellish time of my entire life and could have ruined my career forever. All over a tiny little deal (no damage was done).

    Imagine what these kids would get in the US for writing such a worm. It'd be a helluva lot worse than 5 years in prison. So put your pro-punishment attitudes away and get real. Remember what our government does to computer criminals.

    --
    Why bother.
    1. Re:This Is Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm guessing it wasn't such a tiny little deal to someone else if they called the FBI about it.

    2. Re:This Is Bullshit by TobyWong · · Score: 2, Funny

      He was referring to big P punishment rather than the little p punishment we are used to seeing in the USA.

      'p'unishment = locking a person in a room for a while.
      'P'unishment = beating the poor sod with bamboo canes or cutting off his hand or something.

      --
      - Toby
    3. Re:This Is Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cleary, due process needs to be applied in cases of computer virusry. That due process should end with two 9mm slugs in the offenders forhead behind the courthouse. Done and done. J. Random Script kiddie will think twice about staging a copycat to prove to the world that he has a big penis, and we're all suckers to fall for his trickery.

    4. Re:This Is Bullshit by Lethyos · · Score: 1

      That would have been the IT services at the college I was attending (OTC if it gives any particular people a clue). And in my opinion, it was not that much of a problem for them or anyone involved. I didn't disrupt any systems, just sort of got a little too eager to see if I could do... things. *sheepish look* Come to think of it, this is a pretty pathetic thing to have to defend on Slashdot. I think everyone here knows very well that in under some circumstances, organizations severely overreact when they've been "hacked". Look at my case. I was a student of a university and I broke into some systems on that very university network. Do you honestly think they had real cause for concern? None of the proverbial, "oh, you've got some talent, but must be bored... what can we do to enrich your experience?" Instead, it was two mean agents hauling off my equipment one day when I got back from a physics class (noting as I came home a car with gov't plates sitting on the front lawn of my dorm ;).

      --
      Why bother.
    5. Re:This Is Bullshit by Have+Blue · · Score: 2

      The big P is, more precisely, a punishment that might actually deter them from doing this again. I have no idea what that might be, but hitting them with a stick or locking them up is not it.

    6. Re:This Is Bullshit by cscx · · Score: 1
      Imagine what these kids would get in the US for writing such a worm.
      Remember what happened in Office Space? You get sent to pound-you-in-the-ass prison!
    7. Re:This Is Bullshit by muleboy · · Score: 1

      I didn't realize breaking and entering or trespassing were felonies in most states...

    8. Re:This Is Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You get sent to pound-you-in-the-ass prison!

      Sure makes me proud to be an American. Cruel and unusual??? Hell no, we just sent some kid off to be Spike's girlfriend.

      Wonder where Ashcroft gets his ideas about "No torture here. But we can export them to some Turkish prison where the administration isn't so damned squeamish."

    9. Re:This Is Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      YOU DESERVED IT AND MORE. At a minimum, the school should have immediately expelled you. They should have sent letters to surrounding schools to tell them about your treachery. They should have taken out ads in the local newspapers. They should have then patched/fixed their systems; then they should have (and did) call the FBI. The FBI should have (and did) take your stuff after obtaining a warrant. The FBI should have prosecuted you and worked you hard and really fought for a jail sentence. They should have siezed your computer and sold it to pay for expenses incurred.

      Sheeittt! I'm 59 and I used to think I knew what over the top meant. Then I read your post. I say again, "Sheeittt!"

    10. Re:This Is Bullshit by loraksus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Did you know that you can get off on murder in 3 years?
      The FBI should be actually doing their jobs and hunting down murderers, rapists and people who actually hurt other people instead of hunting down people who write programs to piss people off.
      Put shit into comparison for a second.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    11. Re:This Is Bullshit by Mr.+Piccolo · · Score: 1

      I assume you did more than attempt to use Pine without turning off rsh connections?

      --
      Glückwünsche, haben Sie Slashdot ermordet, indem Sie zum korporativen Druck beugten und Subskriptionen einlei
    12. Re:This Is Bullshit by altagir · · Score: 0, Troll

      About your link (freekevin.com)
      well after reading the site, this guy clearly deserves what he got, and government has actually been pretty easy with him.

      What's the big deal of protecting/releasing people whose action conducts to some others suffering and losing their business ???

      Ya cracker... Just for the fun of learning. Gimme a break!

    13. Re:This Is Bullshit by finkployd · · Score: 2

      That would have been the IT services at the college I was attending (OTC if it gives any particular people a clue).

      If it makes you feel any better, OTC is pretty much hated across the board by all the other three letter computer groups (CAC, OAS, etc)

      Finkployd

    14. Re:This Is Bullshit by duffbeer703 · · Score: 2

      The FBI, being a Federal law-enforcement agency has absolutely no business investigating murder, rape, or most violent crime, since the vast majority of these are state offenses.

      Attempts to do what you suggest have resulted in the nothing more than the abuse of hate crime, civil rights and tax laws by federal law enforcement.

      --
      Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
    15. Re:This Is Bullshit by Magius_AR · · Score: 1
      Computer crimes are MORE than sufficiently punished in the US, thank you very much. I don't know where you get off implying that the US goes easy on computer "crime". I had a little incident during my freshman year of college. The FBI was very determined to get me jail time for a ridiculously minor offense. It was only through sheer wit and creativity of my laywers that we got the offense down to a misdemeanor and a lousy 600$US fine
      Yes, and the ones who seriously and maliciously screw with things get the same lawyers, and the same $600 fine.
      Imagine what these kids would get in the US for writing such a worm. It'd be a helluva lot worse than 5 years in prison. So put your pro-punishment attitudes away and get real. Remember what our government does to computer criminals [freekevin.com].
      One US cracker among thousands gets tossed in jail for a long term jail sentence and that's enough for you to say the US punishes crackers harshly? For each case you give me where a sufficient or harsh sentence was doled out, I could give you about ten in which people were slapped on the wrist (with the exception of the DCMA which is a joke)

      These people deserve to be punished harshly. You can rob a bank for a couple million while threatening people's lives with handguns and get 10 years+ in the slammer. But if you cost companies (cumulatively) a couple million/billion in damages due to DoS/worms/etc and possibly threaten lives due to the compromising of critical systems, you get 5 years or less?

      I sympathize for Mitnick. When he dabbled in cracking, the Internet was FAR from popular. Most companies weren't on the damn thing (compared to today), and he (from what I know of) wasn't so brash as to release devastating worms out into the wild for the hell of it. For these reasons, his sentence may have been a tad harsh. However, in this day and age, MUCH hinges on the Internet, and people who fsck with it in these extreme measures should be dealt with in a similar fashion.

      Magius_AR

    16. Re:This Is Bullshit by loraksus · · Score: 2

      So we have our state trained monkeys investigating the really "important" cases.

      I agree that the feds tend to abuse whatever powers that they are given (i.e. Rico bullshit), but it would be nice to have people who have a bit more pull than the local pd investigating crimes.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    17. Re:This Is Bullshit by duffbeer703 · · Score: 2

      That's what the State Police are for.

      When the local yokels can't handle it, the state guys take over usually. Generally, state police agencies are competent.

      --
      Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
  35. These kids are terrorists! by HanzoSan · · Score: 2



    We all know what happens to terrorists, check out bin laden hiding in the cave!

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:These kids are terrorists! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bin Laden is not in a cave, he is staying in my villa in Damascus with his 4 wives.

  36. Punishment to fit the crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These kids should be made an example of. Please turn them over to the Hammas organization in Palestine. They are quite effective in coming up with appropriate punishments for errant Israeli jews.

    1. Re:Punishment to fit the crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it's a good thing they were Israeli. If they were Palestinian, they would have already been charged as terrorists and shot by the IDF.

    2. Re:Punishment to fit the crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> If they were Palestinian, they would have already been charged as terrorists and shot by the IDF.

      Take away the "charged" part and you'd be right. They just shoot them, no charging needed.

  37. Crackdowns cant even stop crime! by HanzoSan · · Score: 2


    WE have kids in the USA who think its cool to be a gangster, who think being an outlaw is cool, and become criminals.

    When you tell someon they CANT do something, it makes it COOL for them to do it.

    Think about it.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:Crackdowns cant even stop crime! by Afrosheen · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hey Kids! It's cool to be a skr1pt k1dd13! Just like your uncle Bob says: worms are good, worms are great, write a worm and masturbate!

      That should make it uncool enough.

    2. Re:Crackdowns cant even stop crime! by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      When you tell someon they CANT do something, it makes it COOL for them to do it.
      Indeed! It's my mother's refusal to let me ride the subway alone that turned me into a rapid-transit freak...
  38. Make an example by macdaddy · · Score: 2

    I'd like to see them and every other person caught for virus authoring to be held prosecuted to the farthest possible extreme. The newsgroup Hip Crime flooding is a good example of that. My newsgroups noise is so high that I can hardly find legit postings anymore, the goal of the flooding. I'd love to meet the bastard responsible for that in a dark alley with one of my old Sparc keyboards w/ the metal sub-structure so I can show him how us country geeks deal with problems like him.

    1. Re:Make an example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So run a SOCKS honeypot and wait for him to scan you, then spoof a news server and allow him to "post" through it. If it's obviously one of his spews, trace it back to the source and kick some ass.

      I don't know why nobody's done this yet. It IS possible to catch these lusers, especially when they piss in the pool more than once.

  39. outlook address book by Publicus · · Score: 2, Informative

    Why does outlook allow a script/program to access the address book without the user's permission? I think we've seen how costly this bug/feature is, why isn't there more pressure on M$ to fix this problem, or provide the option to turn it off?

    These kids are essentially going to go to juvi/jail for swimming in a pool, when the sign clearly says, "no swimming."

    No fault to the pool owner for not putting a fence around his pool, right? Ah, justice.

    --

    My Karma was at 49, then they switched to words. All that work for nothing!

    1. Re:outlook address book by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      Outlook 2000 with the latest service patches, and Outlook XP/2002 does, in fact, pop up a nifty little 'Program X is trying to access your address book.' and a menu of access types, such as none, this one time, allow for one minute, five minutes, ten minutes, and so on.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    2. Re:outlook address book by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well it's about time! :)

    3. Re:outlook address book by Knobby · · Score: 2

      What is the problem with a script accessing the address book?

      Before flaming me, think about what you're asking.. The address book for Eudora (for example) is a text file! I can write an applescript that accesses the information in the test file without ever talking to Eudora. What will disabling address book support do besides removing a feature that might be very useful (for example, a script that filters your incoming mail according to your address book)..

    4. Re:outlook address book by WildBeast · · Score: 1

      Actually, now it does tell you that a program is trying to access your address book. It may surprise you, but yeah many companies use that feature. Do you really think that MS just felt like adding more code to Outlook just for the heck of it?

    5. Re:outlook address book by CodeMonky · · Score: 2

      The outlook address book (and global address list in exchange) are part of the pst or part of exchange and can only be accessed through vb calls. You can still filter based on addresses because those things are built into outlook.

      and there is nothing wrong with a script accessing the address book as long as the script has permission to access it which is all this patch does, ask you if its ok.

      --
      --"Karma is justice without the satisfaction"
  40. A Suggestion For Corporations and IT Professionals by Ieshan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How about this.

    You set up a simple script that by default, turns off accepting email with attachments on it. When a person in the company NEEDS to view an attachment, the script allows one email with an attachment through to his computer after he fills out a form and submits it to the script (the form is never actually read, but hmph).

    This way, anyone who needs to see an attachment does and must know about it before hand. At the same time, it blocks attachment-outlook-stupidity viruses by disallowing them to shoot through the system on a normal basis.

    Furthermore, any person IN THE COMPANY who sends an attachment to another person in the company that's rejected by the mail server because the recipient hadn't filled in the form has his or her email account locked for 24 hours to stop the virus from spreading.

    Done. Finished. My thoughts.

  41. well, what did you do to piss off the FBI..? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    cmon fucker, spill yer guts.

  42. Here's the other side of this coin. by Matey-O · · Score: 2, Redundant

    After reading throug 30 odd messages that a) slammed Exchange/Outlook/Microsoft or b) said 'Hey, NBD, they're just kids!'

    Here's a little bit of the flipside:

    Our Exchange server weathered it just fine. Why? Because it's running Trend Micro's scanner, and it punts everything but TXT and ZIP files.

    The last three virii that ran through the net DIDN'T affect us. We've got 1200 workstations, 60 odd servers, and _6_ admins. (and a 6 member Help Desk)

    A Microsoft shop CAN be protected, it CAN avoid this crap, and you CAN run an enterprise on these products with a small staff.

    CRIPES!

    Further, the poor little kid is just playing around. Bullshit. There are a bunch of businesses having a hard enough time STAYING IN BUSINESS. They SHOULDN'T HAVE to deal with the financial burden of bouncing and disinfecting their infrastructure.

    --
    "Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
    1. Re:Here's the other side of this coin. by finity · · Score: 1

      Why should you have to BUY something to protect your company. You already paid a whole heck of a lot for your Microsoft servers and such and then you just had to pay more to make them secure from a child's worm.

    2. Re:Here's the other side of this coin. by WildBeast · · Score: 1

      Cool, then Why should you have to BUY insurance? Why should you have to BUY locks? Why should you have to buy a security system? Why should you have to pay taxes for cop's protection?

    3. Re:Here's the other side of this coin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, and you better config your email scanner to pass only sensible and grammatically correct English sentences, because it is just a matter of time for M$ products to get you the ability^H^H^Hfeature to be infect by virus writen as text, and of course, without you bothering to open the email.

    4. Re:Here's the other side of this coin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many shops stick sendmail in front of Exchange for SMTP filtering. What you save in product costs, you end up paying an admin.

    5. Re:Here's the other side of this coin. by moof1138 · · Score: 1

      As far as a) goes, MS email server/client architecture out of the box creates these sort of disasters. It is only with 3rd party addons / a non-default configuration that these things get fixed.

      That is a serious issue that MS should be held accountable for, not some kids who notice how easy it is to exploit.

      As far as the impact on businesses goes, if they foolishly choose a system that puts security and stability as priorities that are secondary to convenience they deserve to go out of business.

      With respect to b), the hoodlum here is the company who designed a system so easy to exploit, not some kids who noticed this and did so. Businesses that have adopted MS solutions and as a consequence of this have to deal with the financial burden of bouncing and disinfecting their infrastructure should join in filing class action suits against MS, not encourage putting kids in jail for being kids.

      --

      Hyperbole is the worst thing ever.
    6. Re:Here's the other side of this coin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You buy insurance because what happens to your love ones when you die accidently? You buy locks you want to protect something. You buy a security system because most older homes don't have one. You pay taxes to provide for law inforcement because not everyone is good.

      However, the best doors usually come with locks. New houses usually come with a security system. New Microsoft software still doesn't come with locks are a security system.

    7. Re:Here's the other side of this coin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think that debate about Exchange is silly.

      Of course if u wanna secure it, you can. But that means you have to buy a full exchange solution and a bunch of addons. then you can reasonably hope you can secure the server and therefore your whole mail solution. and it's the same with every M$ product: you can always try to set up a single point of entry in your network that you secure with everything (apache to hide IIS, safe mail gateways using sendmail/procmail or postfix, and snort to watch all that). but then, why not directly install OSS that does the job very well ?

      And i don't buy the "That's because the perceived value is greater than the perceived costs" argument. I think companies choose exchange either by ignoring any other solution (and end up having huge problems with viruses), or because the manager in charge of buying exchange has been invited to a good restaurant by the M$ sales guy.

      Then one last thing: Outlook Express is the #1 propagator of those viruses. By far. Simply because people use it to pop their mailboxes from their ISP, and sometimes, only by popping it, they spread the virus (badtrans, anyone ?) For me, that's really M$' fault. When you use Eudora or Mozilla-mail out-of-the-box, you don't have such problems, partly because the don't do silly things such as executing VB scripts that so easily can do almost anything on your computer (from listing address book to getting your passwords in the registry). Of course they can be infected by .exe attachments that people open, but that's a windows problem, not a mailer one. And as far as i know, i never had any problem opening an .exe file with Linux ;-))

    8. Re:Here's the other side of this coin. by Graspee_Leemoor · · Score: 1

      "Why should you have to BUY something to protect your company. You already paid a whole heck of a lot for your Microsoft servers"

      Because the DOJ would have MS's ass for bundling email virus scanning solutions with the os, thereby depriving lots of poor old 3rd party email scanners from lots of profit.

      graspee

    9. Re:Here's the other side of this coin. by moof1138 · · Score: 1

      You are right in that since MS email server/client architecture out of the box creates these sort of disasters, so dolts who run a crappy ass install of a crappy ass server with a crappy client with crappy ass users then you do deserve whatever you get.



      But still, kids will be kids. Cracking down hard on kids does not stop kids from being kids, it just makes mean spirited adults feel better. Kids who write viruses do not deserve to go to jail, and putting them there solves nothing, it just makes adults with child-like feelings feel vindicated.

      If adults write viruses it is a whole different story, but I know enough kids who were screwed over by insanely harsh penalties who could have wound up doing a lot of good for society, but instead I now work with them in jail, and hear the hate that they now have for all authority (due to stupid adults acting out on their child-like feelings).

      These are not pretend people, or abstractions, these are real kids. Saying that it is okay to put a kid in jail for writing a computer program is absolutely insane.

      --

      Hyperbole is the worst thing ever.
    10. Re:Here's the other side of this coin. by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2
      As far as a) goes, MS email server/client architecture out of the box creates these sort of disasters. It is only with 3rd party addons / a non-default configuration that these things get fixed.
      Yeah. Lord knows that a good sendmail out-of-the-box install will stop these attachments dead in their tracks.
      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    11. Re:Here's the other side of this coin. by WildBeast · · Score: 1

      Yes, but that stuff doesn't come for free even if they have you believe otherwise. I agree, MS should include an AntiVirus. But I'm sure they don't feel like getting into another lawsuit.

  43. Blaming the kids for messed up software... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Behold, MS allowed it's software to be so messed up that these CHILDREN were able to cause a world wide epidemic.


    Why the hell are we blaming them? They're kids. Blame the Microsoft managers pushing constantly for production without accountability.

    1. Re:Blaming the kids for messed up software... by WildBeast · · Score: 1

      yeah, with your line of thinking, soon enough you'll be saying why blame terrorists? Why blame thiefs? Why blame crackers? Why blame pedophiles? etc.

  44. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you can't find Dr Pepper in Canada you need to remove your head from your ass. It's in the cooler of every variety/grocery store from coast to coast.

  45. Abuse Secured Computer Information Interchange by xixax · · Score: 2

    How about implementing a no attachment policy? Seriously, how many attachments are jokes and/or vaguely amusing pictures or multiple copies of Word docs that can be found on a corporate fileserver anyway?

    Now that web browsers can handle FTP sites, it's easy to show most people how to upload/download content and it's also easy to set up a low level of security (blind directories etc.) that is comparable to sending stuff over email (if it's confidential, it shouldn't be going out over email anyway).

    Xix.

    --
    "Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
    1. Re:Abuse Secured Computer Information Interchange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the level of ignorance in your post suggests that you're in college or high school, and never had a job that didn't involve flipping hamburgers, so I'll take pity on you and not point out what a dumbass you are.

    2. Re:Abuse Secured Computer Information Interchange by Detritus · · Score: 2

      At many companies, Word and Powerpoint attachments are the preferred media for corporate communications. It's a huge waste of bandwidth, but that is what the suits like to use. Putting the documents on a corporate file server doesn't work for those employees who are are off-site and don't have access to the corporate intranet.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  46. Re:A Suggestion For Corporations and IT Profession by mrseigen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    any person IN THE COMPANY who sends an attachment to another person in the company that's rejected by the mail server because the recipient hadn't filled in the form has his or her email account locked for 24 hours to stop the virus from spreading.

    Well, I know that if I told Stan from accounting I was going to send him a file, and in his normal scatterbrain manner, completely forgot about it, and subsequently had the attachment bounced and my account locked, Stan from accounting would lose his legs. But otherwise, this plan is good, if a little draconian. Maybe just filters against certain executable file types would be a better idea.

  47. Here's a bomb, enjoy!! by Penguinoflight · · Score: 1

    How are you is common to the sircom virus, The effect of these virii is basically like giving someone a bomb, which replicates itself to other people, but this bomb doesn't go off by itself, you have to be using a rediculous email program, and set the bomb off.

    --
    "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
    1 John 4:14
    1. Re:Here's a bomb, enjoy!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any email program that permits the use of email attachments in any form is a dangerous propogater for these "bombs." If the user isn't going to pay attention to "Warning: Web pages, executables, or other attachments may contain viruses or scripts that can be harmful to your computer. It is important to be certain that this file is from a trustworthy source," they're going to run that attachment any way they can, even if they have to go through the process of saving it first. I would really like you to explain to the operational managers of the world that you are going to rid the world of attachments. You'd be laughed to the unemployment line.

    2. Re:Here's a bomb, enjoy!! by PurpleBob · · Score: 2

      Wow. That's one heck of an analogy.

      "An e-mail virus is like a bomb. Well, not really a bomb, but a bomb that's like an e-mail virus."

      --
      Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
  48. Re:at least IT is paid by the hour. by theancient2 · · Score: 1

    Are trojan horses that rely on user ignorance limited exclusively to products created by Microsoft? I don't think so. Idiot users are idiot users no matter what software they use.

  49. That's right, punish KIDS... by tcc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For grown up security mistakes...

    Part of the process of being a kid is learning... While I do not approve destruction or paralizing IT infrastructures, this seriously bugs me depending on the seriousness of the punishment.

    Meanwhile, LOADS of spammers are still clugging my Hotmail inbox at a rate of at least 20 spam a day, my ISP email account receives at *LEAST* 5 spams a day, multiply that by X amount of users, THERE'S a big bandwidth waste. These people are still running free and going stronger than ever!

    Those lame virus lasts for about a week. If after that, anyone else gets caught, they need to *LEARN* the HARD WAY like "doing backup is a good idea because you never know when your system might fail", well the same should go with "Update that antivirus file, because you never know what might hit you". Heck, the antivirus programs offers to do it automatically, there's no excuses.

    --
    --- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
    1. Re:That's right, punish KIDS... by tcc · · Score: 2

      You probably didn't do anything stupid when you were a kid, right?

      The only difference now is that the same kids in a different era of technology are doing stuff with what they have on their hands. While I *DID* say that it shouldn't go unpunished... 5 years in jail at that age, you're SURE to bread criminals, think about it... spending 5 years in jail from 30 to 35 is NOT the same than before 20, while you're whipping their asses, some other kids will do the same shit because of the attention it gets.

      Basically you're not fighting the problem, the problem is the SOURCE itself, and it's NOT the kids, it's the LACK OF SECURITY FEATURES in the software.

      You're lucky this time it was kids doing a prank, when it's going to be a real hacker that will grab loads of credit card number by exploiting a similar flaw, you'll rethink twice and be glad some kid would have found it first.

      --
      --- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
    2. Re:That's right, punish KIDS... by A_Non_Moose · · Score: 1

      ...you're SURE to bread criminals...

      And deep fried, I hope?

      KFC, Kentucky Fried Criminals...interesting idea, no? Don't tar and feather, bread and deep fry.

      Heh, I love typo's...they are fun to play with.

      "Everyone, down on the floor! I've got a pun and I know how to use it!

      .

      --
      Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
    3. Re:That's right, punish KIDS... by jjeff · · Score: 1

      Mail servers exist today that are perfectly secure.

      Name One.
      There is no such thing as perfectly secure software, however the most secure software is updated regularly with patches etc. (this doesnt seem to happen with outlook.. even new releases contain the same bugs as previous versions (sometimes more) I cant speak for exchange).

      I also dont beleive these kids should go to jail, perhaps a better punishment to fit the crime would be that microsoft hires them as their security team. ;-)
      At 15 they are still in the developmental stage and surrounding them with criminals is going to be a terrible environment for them. There is the choice of turning them into hardened criminals by only allowing them criminals to interact with or find a punishment which is a little more humane, and perhaps will expand their skills for use in more productive ways.

      --
      when everything is working perfectly.. BREAK SOMETHING before something else FUCKS up!
  50. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  51. hate crimes by mizerai · · Score: 3, Funny


    I believe these kids are guilty of hate crimes against stupid people.

    --

    --Mizerai

  52. Idiot Email Admins Allowing Such Attachments by Xochil · · Score: 1

    Geez, how many times do companies have to be hit with the same types of trojans, before they get clue and start blocking .scr and .pif attachments. Companies getting smacked by such things as Goner, for hiring mail admins who haven't learned after putting their hand on the burner over a dozen times.

  53. Easy fix by Casca · · Score: 0

    How about this for an easy fix for any more worms... Have a "word of the day" that a user would have to prepend to the subject line of any message they send out. If it isn't in the subject line, the server just trashes the message. Maybe you could even strip the word out when the message gets sent (I don't know if exchange can do this or not).

    Its cheap, I think it would be effective, and it only requires the user to type an extra word on the subject line. The best part is, if the users don't want to play along, they don't have too, and noone gets their mail anymore.!

    --
    Casca
    1. Re:Easy fix by scorcherer · · Score: 1

      How are you going to hide the WOTD from the worm?

      --

      --
      The Cap is nigh. Time to get a fresh new account.

    2. Re:Easy fix by Casca · · Score: 1

      Uhh, announce it over the loudspeaker, write it in the sky, send it out via email, put it on the logon screen for the user, stamp it on their forehead as they walk through the front door...

      I'm not sure I understand the problem with this?

      --
      Casca
    3. Re:Easy fix by Casca · · Score: 1

      You know, my comments get modded down sometimes, and it usually doesn't bother me. This time it does. What the hell is overrated about this idea? Why wouldn't it work? I'm not suggesting it is the all-time fix for worms, but within an organization it would pretty much make them go away. Am I missing something obvious here?

      --
      Casca
    4. Re:Easy fix by mce · · Score: 1

      A lot of mail gets send fully automatically for very good reasons. That is what you are missing.

    5. Re:Easy fix by Casca · · Score: 1

      So you post it to an internal company website, and the guy that sends out automated emails writes a perl script to grab the word and stick it in the subject line.

      Still seems like it would work.

      --
      Casca
    6. Re:Easy fix by mce · · Score: 1

      Good try, but it assumes that the mail sending program can be edited. This is not always the case.

    7. Re:Easy fix by Casca · · Score: 1

      Ok, its the Exchange client that causes all the problems right? I wouldn't think that some program that sends email automatically would need to use Exchange, so you could exclude email from this one account without too much risk.

      I live in a UNIX world, so I'm used to having the ability to do things to mail before it leaves my machine. I guess I don't know what the best fix is if the program has to use Exchange to send it's automatic mail.

      In any case, it seems like these cases would be limited, and the rule could be applied to the broader base of human clients to achieve the desired effect.

      --
      Casca
  54. Punishment in US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good thing they weren't ripping disney movies, the bad mouse would send them up the river for 15 years.

  55. Israeli kids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now if they were Palestianians they could be executed as terrorists without any trial, or even arrest. Shame.

  56. Re:A Suggestion For Corporations and IT Profession by Casca · · Score: 1

    Heck, how about a timer that prevents more than a message every minute from being sent from any single user? If the system receives more than three emails from the same user in less than a minute it locks their account.

    Kind of like how you can't submit a comment to slashdot unless it takes you at least 30 seconds or something to compose it.

    --
    Casca
  57. Good heuristic scanning by bubblegoose · · Score: 1

    Why most scanners still need constant definition updates and can not do good heuristic scanning is beyond me.

    Oh wait...that's right most companies charge for yearly updates.

    Why make a better product that wouldn't require constant updates when you can make an inferior product and charge yearly for the ability to perform updates?

    I guess AV companies also follow the Microsoft model.

    --
    I hope that someday we will be able to put away our fears and prejudices and just laugh at people. - Jack Handey
  58. Re:Punish the kids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    Why not those who choose to use those crappy M$ products, or those silly MC?? sys admins?

    Maybe I use MS products because I like skipping standard "compile->read manpages->2 hour configuration because no one uses standard configs" process. But, unlike you I don't need to hide behind Linux, I can figure out which attachments to open and which not to open.

  59. Re:Wasting??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    heh, you must work in an Outlook environment. I must say that last week wasn't that busy for me.. only one reported case of the goner virus (approx 200 users using NS4 messenger). The extent of the damage on the infected computer was the virus wiping out the AV software (and twenty minutes of my time I'll never get back). It didn't even do any mass mailings...

  60. Re:at least IT is paid by the hour. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What do you do IF no one will use anything else?
    And they don't have to because there are no consequences....and there is no training and there
    are two hundred hosts , 7 servers and one admin.
    Hint:
    You suck it up, and wish virus writers worked there.

  61. Re:A Suggestion For Corporations and IT Profession by mce · · Score: 1

    Are you for real?

    Whenever I release a new version of the product I'm working on, I prepare all anouncement mails beforehand. For reasons that are irrelevant here, these usually are not all identical. So I can't simply send one mail to an single list address. When all of them are ready (usually there are about 5), I manually send them out one right after the other. This will easily make me send more than 3 in less than a minute.

    If I ever need to automate this procedure, my rate will be even higher.

  62. Don't whine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whining about worms is about as productive as whining about stupid people. If you give stupid people the power to take down your network, they will. Either take away that power, or live with it, but either way, don't let something like this make you sick.

  63. TALENTS??!! by mgandhi2 · · Score: 1

    I am willing to bet on the fact that these "scriptkiddies" have no complete knowledge of what they have done(if they actually had in fact done ANYTHING). I'm also willing to bet that 90% of these "l33t" teenagers download the viruses from the latest crack-n-hack site. A 15 year old who understands the intricacies of computer programming enough to write an original hack is a rare thing. The fact that any of these viruses actually spread is just dumb luck. Send a downloaded email hack to the right person and it will infest a company network, which will infest the rest of the web. Its given far more credit than deserved to suggest this dumb luck and ignorance, these "talents", can be harnessed. I say slap their hands and cut their connection. Either that or actually teach them how to do it RIGHT, and weasel in some hacker ethics.

    --
    I have no desire to reach nirvana.
    1. Re:TALENTS??!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5 minutes spent reading the code to the visual basic virus of the day is enough to convince you that it was written by a 14 year old.

  64. are they jewish? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    because if not, then the law in israel would treat them differently and therefore severely punish them. does anybody know whether they are?

    1. Re:are they jewish? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just look and see if the worm was circumcised :-)

  65. Re:A Suggestion For Corporations and IT Profession by Casca · · Score: 1

    As with everything, there is always an exception. So you send an email to the server telling it to exclude you from the timer for the next X emails. Then send away.

    Nice people skills btw.

    --
    Casca
  66. Canada does it best by Error27 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For the kid who DoSed yahoo and cnn a while back. They put him a government reform school for 8 months.

    That is enough punishment for a silly prank.

    And I can't simpathize with the people who blame the users for openning the attachments. Teaching users not to open emails that have "Hi" as the subject line is only a short term solution. Trying to get users to remember which types of files are executable is not an option either. (Until a year ago, I assumed that .doc files were not executable.)

    A better solution is to not allow executable attachments which end in .doc, .vbs, or .exe onto the network.

    An even better solution is for Microsoft to fix their programs or for people to not use Microsoft products.

    1. Re:Canada does it best by thedeacon · · Score: 1

      While an even better solution would be for the US Government would be to get off of their lobbyist-padded asses and really PUNISH Microsoft for unleashing these products on people and using their chicanery to gain market share of monopolistic proportions.

      Just a thought...

      thedeacon

      --
      the deacon...that's all you need to know for now
    2. Re:Canada does it best by Error27 · · Score: 1
      I think Microsoft should be punished for abusing there monopoly status. Especially when you consider that they have already been found quilty and all.

      But it's a bad idea to punish software companies for security problems.

      Open source products have less security problems but they generally have less money to spend on lawyers as well. I think that they would suffer more than Microsoft.

  67. Re:A Suggestion For Corporations and IT Profession by mce · · Score: 1
    Furthermore, any person IN THE COMPANY who sends an attachment to another person in the company that's rejected by the mail server because the recipient hadn't filled in the form has his or her email account locked for 24 hours to stop the virus from spreading.

    I can't believe I'm reading this. And even less that someone moderated this up as being interesting. Sarcastic would have been more appropriate. Except that it likely wasn't meant to be that.

    Have you guys ever worked in a real company?

    Besides the idea ain't safe either: it's full of race conditions.

  68. Re:A Suggestion For Corporations and IT Profession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Say goodbye to your customers trying to send you orders over email.

  69. procmail filter by CodeMonky · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There is a nice procmail filter (ftp://ftp.rubyriver.com/pub/jhardin/antispam/proc mail-security.html) that renames incoming attachments and makes them non-double clickable as well as pseudo scans office dcuments for dangerous macros.

    The extra level of 'abstraction' (the user having to rename the file to run it) has saved us from every major email born virus in the past two years while still allowing people to get there precious attachments if they are expecting them.

    --
    --"Karma is justice without the satisfaction"
  70. Actually be punished? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Five *years* because people can't listen to SIMPLE DAMNED INSTRUCTIONS ON WHAT NOT TO DO WHEN CHECKING THEIR E-MAIL?

    I think we should turn the US into a police state, and start executing people who, in ignorance, open up mails stating, "I ask your advice!"

    ..Sorry. A bit bitter today. Not that I condone hosers spreading virii, but mad props to these kids - they've taught me to never underestimate the stupidity of people.

    "Oh! I got that e-mail you warned me about and opened it! Just like you said to!"

    "I said not to. *NOT* to."

    "No you didn't! You said to open it!"

    ...In the server room, no one can hear you scream.

  71. virus writers are terrorists! by dakoda · · Score: 1

    man, get with it! =) virsu writers are now terrorists, and we should do everything in out power to destroy them. we should even go so far as to harm innocent users in the quest to kill viruses. /sarcasm

    however, i agree, jail time is a shame. they were only doing their job. think of how many people might have learned somethign from that one, and how many more didn't learn a damn thing. perhaps companies could use such information in a useful manner...

    all because we do not understand simple policy. it's funny how people who don't follow the rules (virus writers) get punished, while people who don't follow the rules (retard's who cliked) don't get punished. I couldn't care less, as I will be neither one.
    yeah, when i was a younger coder i figured writing viruses would be cool, and even now i toy with the idea simply because i really don't like microsoft products and find that breaking into 'secure' systems thru simple measures is amusing, but that isn't useful as a future, and im more of a white hat anyways. if some average joe let bob gang banger into his living room, and joe gets shot, joe wouldn't be held responsible. thats how they work. =(

  72. Don't worry too much. by Apuleius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They're first time offenders who confessed. They're high school students who would otherwise be preparing to be drafted to the Israeli army soon, and the government will not want to disrupt that if it isn't necessary. Finally, they are from a town that is notorious for inducing boredom for its teenagers. They may get a few months, but I wouldn't count on it, and they'll get assigned to the Ma'asiahu prison, where conditions are very good (it's Israel's prison for first time offenders, and it's probably the only place in the world you could call a re-education camp without irony.)

    1. Re:Don't worry too much. by gnovos · · Score: 4, Troll

      They're first time offenders who confessed. They're high school students who would otherwise be preparing to be drafted to the Israeli army soon, and the government will not want to disrupt that if it isn't necessary. Finally, they are from a town that is notorious for inducing boredom for its teenagers.

      No, no, no! They are T E R R O R I S T S! Come on people, if you let terrorists like these kids off the hook, it's only a matter of time before they start bombing things and mailing anthrax, right? Gotta be tough.

      --
      "Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
    2. Re:Don't worry too much. by linzeal · · Score: 0, Troll

      If they were palestine kids the israelis would of killed 3 or 4 children, 10 adults, and wounded scores to make a point. Then it would get nasty.

    3. Re:Don't worry too much. by imrdkl · · Score: 1

      You and your moderator are confused and pitiful.

    4. Re:Don't worry too much. by flewp · · Score: 1

      You're right, they are terrorists. And Israel better hand them over the the U.S. for a military tribunal. If they don't, they are obviously harboring terrorists and we must begin bombing!

      --
      WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
    5. Re:Don't worry too much. by Talla · · Score: 1

      They are T E R R O R I S T S!

      I wish that hadn't been marked as funny. If they had been Palestins, there is no doubt every newspaper would have called them terrorists. Of course, because they're Israelis, soon to be fighting the holy war (/crusade) against terrorism, they're just misguided kids.

    6. Re:Don't worry too much. by MostlyHarmless · · Score: 2

      Without starting a massive flamewar about the Middle East which would still not make us agree and in the meantime just piss off everyone else on slashdot, I do want to correct a misperception.

      I (most unfortunately) get the majority of my news from mainstream sources, and it is rare that they call palestinians "terrorists". Even Hamas or Islamic Jihad members (both of these are terrorist organizations) are listed as "activists" or "militants" by U.S. papers. It works both ways: Palestinians who are protesting peacefully are labelled roughly the same way protesters in Seattle were labeled (not in a positive light), by the same paper that will also show a picture of Israelis apparently firing on rock-throwing children (with gunmen behind the children, not shown in the photo).

      In summary: if both Israelis and Palestinians think the papers are biased, the news sources might just be taking the appropriate, centrist line that doesn't choose sides.

      --
      Friends don't let friends misuse the subjunctive.
    7. Re:Don't worry too much. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you just think a little instead of going with your theories on prisons and re-educaiton camps? This is no fucking US. Thiese kids will get only conditional punishment, and the guy who wrote the thing will be grabbed by an elite computer unit the moment he joins IDF.

    8. Re:Don't worry too much. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Without starting a massive flamewar about the >Middle East...

      ?

      >(with gunmen behind the children, not shown in >the photo).

      funny! I missed that!

    9. Re:Don't worry too much. by linzeal · · Score: 1

      Why because I speak the truth? The israelis may cry the pity party and denounce the violence imposed upon them as "terrorism" but it might as well be the "communism" of the cold war which wrote blank checks for retaliation for anyone combating it. Radicalism does not come from wealth and dignity it comes from poverty and oppression. If israel and the US changed their respective policies we would not have to deal with this, but they won't and we do.

    10. Re:Don't worry too much. by imrdkl · · Score: 1
      Change their policies? Towards what? Towards not wanting to be driven into the sea, perhaps? They tried. They were ready to give up even more. Now that time is past.

      Deal with what? Deal with the fact that most everyone could care less about the jews except US? Thats what we have been doing rather nicely for a long time. Now is not the time to stop, imho.

  73. No problem! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    What's the big deal? I haven't had any problems with any of my computers.

    Of course, I run Linux on 2/3 of them, and Eudora or Opera on the rest. Outhouse isn't welcome at my place.

    After the events of the last year, the so-called "victims" of Goner share at least part of the blame. The Microsoft Monoculture strikes again! And to top it off, it's lousy as far as security goes!

  74. My users are great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    many call me before opening strange attachments. Most will call me if they did open one they thought was odd. That's a very good thing. I had one person get goner that day. I cleaned it off by hand, and the worst part was his computer is a pos p100 running 95 and very slow.

    I saw people talking about having users upgrade virus software on their own. I never considered that because it'd never happen. Since most computers are NT, I just have the login script call a batchfile that stops the virus scan service, copies the upgrade files, and then start the service again (net stop/start is your friend). It does this everytime they log in. Since they're using ms products, I know that the virus signatures won't be more than 2 weeks old.

    1. Re:My users are great by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      Or use a managed antivirus software whereby the server component grabs the virus defs, and punts them down to the clients.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  75. Re:at least IT is paid by the hour. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't have to open it to read it. Just leave Outlook's preview feature enabled.

  76. Re:GPL: Intellectual Protection or Intellectual Th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What you REALLY need is a new lawyer, Preferably one who can actually read and comprehend. Virtually all of the statements you quoted from your lawyer are incorrect.

  77. Re:GPL: Intellectual Protection or Intellectual Th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Token ring is uberleet.

  78. kinda funny how easy people are being by Erris · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Had this little worm come from Afganistan, the originating hut would have a bomb dropped on it. Hell, if these two had been US the response would be harsher. Where's all the "hacking is terrorism" rhetoric? I don't agree with talk like that, but it's funny that those who have been spouting off are not stepping up to demand punishment.

    What would we think if real damage had been done? The hack was made easy by M$'s complete lack of security, and it did not do much damage because no one really trusts an M$ platform. But what if this had been a super new BIND attack with a nasty payload? Suppose it had installed backdoors in bank accounts that had been used to funnel money out of accounts?

    At the very least, they should be held liable for the monetary damage. What they did was as deliberate and damaging as arson. Why not put a lien on their paychecks for years to come, payable to anyone who can prove damages?

    --
    DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
    1. Re:kinda funny how easy people are being by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From Afghanistan?

      I'm afraid not. The one guy there with his Commodore 64 is too busy waiting for his DivX movies to download off the internet....

    2. Re:kinda funny how easy people are being by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the very least, they should be held liable for the monetary damage.

      That's a complete crock. First, I doubt these kids have enough money among them to pay a serious US sysadmin's salary for a single day. Second, assessing monetary damages in this kind of stuff is a complete game, run by those who have the greatest interest in making the damage look astronomical. I once read an article on security that suggested immediately hiring a team of outside consultants to assess the damage. (Guess where their interest lies.) The reason given for hiring these guys was not to find out actual damages, but to jack up the cleanup costs into a range where the hit qualified as a felony.

  79. Re:Punish the kids? by Anonymous+DWord · · Score: 2

    How very clever of you. Too bad the 800,000 people passing these worms around don't know as well as you which attachments to open, and which not to.

    --
    "If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
  80. What Language? by NeuroMorphus · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know what Language they used to program it?

    --

    python >>>
    reduce(lambda x,y:x+y,map(lambda x:chr(ord(x)^42),tuple('zS^BED\nX_FOY\x0b')))
    1. Re:What Language? by Alioth · · Score: 3, Informative

      According to Symantec.com, it was Visual Basic.

  81. Re:at least IT is paid by the hour. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Using products that suck is your own fault".

    For what it's worth, Microsoft is the biggest fish out there. In a large business with many users that aren't technically proficient, learning to use another program is difficult. So, Outlook is what they use and Outlook is what you'll find.

    Blaming the users will not solve anything. It's nice to turn up your nose at their technical inferiority, but I fail to the how that helps anyone.

  82. Re:at least IT is paid by the hour. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >How many 15 year olds do you know that can rob >a bank?

    I know this is offtopic, but.. thousands? you certainly dont live in a third world country!
    It's not about the age, really.

  83. Re:Punish the kids? by kz45 · · Score: 0

    How very clever of you. Too bad the 800,000 people passing these worms around don't know as well as you which attachments to open, and which not to.

    if those same 800,000 people were using linux, they would STILL have spread the worm.

  84. Expect all you want.... by barzok · · Score: 2
    it still won't happen. Two months after NIMDA came out, a PC belonging to one of our remote users popped up and started attempting to push the thing onto any computer it could find.

    This after all the usual emails after a virus and instructions on updating DAT files (click here, click there, if it says to reboot, do so, and that was it).

    As much as we'd all like it to happen, non-IT people will not turn on their brains and apply logic & critical thinking to computer situations.

    1. Re:Expect all you want.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Lemme guess - W2K laptop with Personal Web Server installed? When Nimda hit, we did a count of any IIS installs, including W2K clients and checked them - one by one. Luckily we have no need for IIS and weren't running it.

      Nimda is still running around out there and probably will for some time. After all, when tens of thousands of hosts are infected, you can expect some to remain undiscovered (admin must be under a rock somewhere, tho.)

    2. Re:Expect all you want.... by barzok · · Score: 2

      Honestly, we don't know. All we have is the user ID, and I only know because I heard from someone else that the box was getting hit (virus control is the Security department's area, and I get slapped if I step on their toes. They had already been notified) and I checked the Event Viewer. Since it's a field user, we don't have much control over what software they do or don't have installed on their PC.

  85. For the children! by anfloga · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "The kids face up to five years -- of course since they aren't in the U.S., they might actually be punished."

    What kind of stupid statement is that??? The U.S. shares the honor of being a country which will execute people for crimes committed in childhood with only one other country in the world -- Libya. Great company there.

    Your statement implies that our government is soft on the law-breaking young -- HARDLY! Rather, it's attitude towards (non-white, anyway) children is nothing short of bloodthirst.

    1. Re:For the children! by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1, Troll
      Your statement implies that our government is soft on the law-breaking young -- HARDLY! Rather, it's attitude towards (non-white, anyway) children is nothing short of bloodthirst.
      And since the kids whodunnit are jews, they'll definitely get scot-free in the US.
  86. Re:GPL: Intellectual Protection or Intellectual Th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only if you've never heard of Arcnet. Beeotch.

  87. Are fucked in the head ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only a dum ass would say something like that.
    I got BSC in Comp Sci and I do not use shit windows product.
    Get a life man.

    1. Re:Are fucked in the head ? by kz45 · · Score: 0

      Only a dum ass would say something like that.
      I got BSC in Comp Sci and I do not use shit windows product.
      Get a life man.


      you must be a troll.

      Or a person who obviously get their "bang for their buck" with a BSC in Computer Science.

  88. Justice by Shadowin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The kids face up to five years -- of course since they aren't in the U.S., they might actually be punished.

    Ok, I know I'll probably get marked as troll, but oh well.
    The way I see, is these kids are kinda like Big Tobacco. They make something that's harmful, and the people that use it do so of their own free will, despite the countless warnings given out that they should not. It seems funny to me that the same people who think Big Tobacco shouldn't be punished, also think that any mischeivous kids should be severely punished. Well, that is unless it's their own kid.

  89. Re:at least IT is paid by the hour. by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

    Linux wouldn't let a 'user' cripple the system, only r00t could do that.

  90. Re:at least IT is paid by the hour. by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

    Many 15 year olds I know own cars, when it is illegal to drive at 15 [here].

    Many have stolen huge ticket items, sell drugs and one even stopped traffic [by directing one car into another].

    Get your head out of the sand people... inner cities of america [white kids too [mostly]] are worse than many third world countries.

  91. Defense against information warfare by xiphosuran · · Score: 5, Interesting

    These virus writers are doing a public service. Serious problems with our communications infrastructure might not be fixed if it weren't for them.

    Imagine what could happen if the first exploits of these security flaws came, not piecemeal from a scattering of amateurs, but rather from some adversary who could call on the services of numbers of technically proficient individuals. A hostile government say, or a terrorist movement that drew in disaffected persons in many countries. What if the vast majority of business users had no idea of how vulnerable they were until the system suffered a massive failure?

    There is an enormous learning process going. People are finding out the hard way, what they would never otherwise have the time to focus on: computers can fail, for very subtle reasons, and we are more dependent on them every day.

    1. Re:Defense against information warfare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh bullshit. So our communications infrastructure is now based on Microsoft Outlook.

      The real problem is that Microsoft doesn't want to learn the lessons told by the Unix folk and is doomed to repeat them many times over.

      We should be putting the blame squarely on Microsoft for this "virus" problem because it is their shitty products that are the real reason we have such things as "Goner","I Love You", "Snow White", etc.

      Execute something when previewd....might as well leave the doors unlooked and the safe open with a sign saying free money....

    2. Re:Defense against information warfare by tommyServ0 · · Score: 1

      And they are giving us a job. I mean let's say people stop opening up these attachments for good. Not a single email worm was ever received again. That's a lot of work or billable hours that will be eliminated for the computer industry.

      Not that I don't hate having to remove them for the people that click on the friggin' things, but hey, someone's got to do it.

      --

      Consider the daffodil. And while you're doing that, I'll be over here, looking through your stuff.
    3. Re:Defense against information warfare by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      Imagine what could happen if the first exploits of these security flaws came, not piecemeal from a scattering of amateurs, but rather from some adversary who could call on the services of numbers of technically proficient individuals. A hostile government say, or a terrorist movement that drew in disaffected persons in many countries. What if the vast majority of business users had no idea of how vulnerable they were until the system suffered a massive failure?
      And what do you know if it isn't already done? Some serious organizations bent on deeply infltrating western economies to damage would know better than do juvenile pranks like wiping all data on lawyer's computers!!!! They would instead spread thin and wide, and root deep for a while, lay dormant until, when they'll be thoroughly spread-out, wreak havoc like you haven't seen before!

      Think of it as the cybernetic version of the World Trade Center.

  92. Burger Flipper by xixax · · Score: 2

    Of the attachments I receive at work (no, I do not flip burgers):

    - About a third are irrelevant to work
    - About a third could have been done as text
    - About a third already exist on fileservers

    Then think about the amount of effort in building an insanely large Exchange server to host all this junk and, and compare it to the *very* modest box we used to use for mail. I used to accumilate maybe 20 Mb of mail a *year*, now I accumilate much more than that per month. On average, each of our users have about 200 Mb of "vital" correspondence in PST files clagging their homes (and the PST files starts to spontaneously combust when they top 70Mb or so). After all this, I think we have gone backwards in terms of investment/utility. We are paying a lot of money so people can use Word as their email editor and ignore good file management practises.

    Yes, I'd agree that convincing PHBs they don't want floral pattern wallpaper on their email is a lost struggle, but the 1% of attachments people actually need would be far more effectively sent through other means and our mail infrastructure would be a tenth its current size.

    Attachments are a PITA.

    Xix.

    --
    "Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
  93. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  94. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  95. Not in the US? by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    I'm a little confused by this:
    of course since they aren't in the U.S., they might actually be punished.

    The US has the toughest Anti-hacking laws of almost anywhere, other then china of course, where you can be exicuted for it (actualy, that's pretty much the way things are with any crimes these days, the US punishes harder then any country other then china). And, our laws have only been made tougher by the new anti-terrorism bills. In fact, had these kids been in the US they could have been tried as terrorists. (and I mean they must be terrorists, they're from the middle east!)

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  96. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0, Troll

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  97. You know it's entirely possible to disable that. by autopr0n · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    M$ outlook allows you to disable all exicutable content from being sent through the mail. You also could easily have setup Exchange to filter out those messages.

    In other words, its your own damn fault, and that of your users.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  98. Re: Linux wouldn't let a 'user' cripple the system by chrisvdp74656 · · Score: 1

    No, but it would let them 'rm -rf ~'. This is all a virus has to do to a user to bugger them up good and proper. They can still use all the apps, they just lost all the stuff they did with them.

    And don't lecture me about backups, what about that top-priority email you got from a client 30 mins. after the backup was done and 30 minutes before that 'bugfix' from 'Admin'?

    Oops.

    Chris

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  99. Why let it go so far? by rnicey · · Score: 3, Informative

    We run Sophos antivirus on the mail gateway. Sure it doesn't stop them all, but most anything that is a single click fatality is screened out. It happily killed all 120+ attempts of the Goner-A worm to arrive on one of my customer service rep's desktops.

    I really have little sympathy for IT admins who get killed by this stuff, there are a million tools out there to stop this stuff from doing damage way before idiot humans get their hands on it.

    I personally would like to see more ISPs use this stuff, after all they're not obliged to carry any traffic they deem high risk to their users. They already block dodgy ports so windows shares aren't wide open, why not a complimentary virus scan on mail?

    1. Re:Why let it go so far? by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2
      I really have little sympathy for IT admins who get killed by this stuff, there are a million tools out there to stop this stuff from doing damage way before idiot humans get their hands on it.
      I was of the same attitude, until I honestly heard a PHB say 'we cannot use a virus scanner on our email; it might block something that it shouldn't, and that could cost the company thousands of dollars.'
      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    2. Re:Why let it go so far? by rnicey · · Score: 1

      Which is why all the dodgy stuff it strips out gets sent to a quarantine account where somebody sensible can take a look at it, attempt disinfection, and/or pass it on.

      It's quite cool stuff.

    3. Re:Why let it go so far? by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I used scanmail for exchange myself. My point is that the people who write your paycheques can be impervious to such trivialities like 'logic' and 'reason.'

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  100. you make a valid point by xeeno · · Score: 1

    Since serving in the military is mandatory for israeli citizens, why not put them to work for the military, either in improving the network or attacking enemy resources?

  101. Re:nobody loves me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you do that

  102. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  103. Re:GPL: Intellectual Protection or Intellectual Th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    take a look at the username before replying next time...

  104. Certs? by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    I've never gone through this phase and I have several certifications to date.

    I'm not aware of any certs for actual coding out there. Anyway, having Certs doesn't make you any kind of a programmer (not to say your aren't, but there isn't any evidence that you are)

    perhaps if you had a degree or something.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:Certs? by twilightzero · · Score: 1

      Hate to burst your bubble but in my experience, the programmers with the degrees are FAR worse at programming for at the very least the first 5-7 years of their employment. After that the ones who are truly interested in programming and computers get enough experience to catch up with the true enthusiasts who code as their hobby and profession. I'm not saying that all CS majors are just in it for the money, but it seems that a lot of them are. I've lost count of the number of degreed programmers I've worked with who could ONLY write in C++ and VB and considered themselves hot stuff. The saddest thing I think I ever saw was the day the Anna Kournikova worm hit us. The company I was at at the time had 30 people open it. TWENTY ONE of these ppl were programmers!!! They all said they opened it because they wanted to see what it would do, not realizing that, oh wait, this is code I've never seen before, maybe I should at least open it up and read it before running it. And this company paid very good money for their programmers too, so it's not like they had the bottom of the barrel. But SO many professional programmers out there today have intensely narrow CS degrees in which they were taught C++, VC++, VB, and some Java only. The ones that are truly interested in computers already know half of it before they start the program anyway AND go and learn other languages for the simple sake of knowing more.

      Anyway that's my experience, flame me if you want =)

      --

      "Christ what a design! I could eat a handful of iron filings and PUKE a better emergency pump than that!"
  105. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  106. I hate to point this out... by Mashiki · · Score: 1

    But script kiddies have no skills...why do you think the hacking and cracking community calls them script kiddies?

    They do one thing, take other peoples work and run it. They know nothing, zip zero zilch...now if we turned around and made them work in an IT dept. where the servers were constantly over run by virii/trojans/ect run by other script kiddies, maybe that would get though to them.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  107. More CommanderTako Ignorance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > [...] - of course since they aren't in the U.S., they might actually be punished.

    As somone who's personally had their life crapped upon by an OSI *investigation*, I can tell you that punishment doesn't always come in the form of a "conviction" in the good old USA.

    Beyond that, the comment in and of itself is *extremely* ignorant. I'd suggest that you actually find out what the state of affiars is with respect to the prosecution of computer crime before running your trap in such a manner.

    ...and just in case you're too lazy (which ./ has a long history of being), the reality is that most successfully prosecuted computer crime cases use a time-line prosecution method that does not presupose any technical competency by jurors. A good hacker (and I'm not talking about highschool kids joyriding on the Internet), can work the average shmuck (and that includes most of the people who work at ./; wasn't ./ hacked not too long ago?) in such a manner that the average computer crime investigator at even the Federal level will take the shmuck down. The harvesting of low hanging fruit, after all, is a government speciality and to be fair, if I were a cog in the government/civil service wheel, I'd be taking the fast path of least resistance to a GS13 billet as well... rememeber, when you retire, your pension is less than *half* your final pay grade... what's the big deal if you crush a few people, who may or may not be innocent, on the way to making sure your reitrement is comfortable? The Answer? After having been exposed to *years* of the mind-numbingly empty, ethically-void, morally neutral environement of government work: Nothing.

  108. Other solution by Betcour · · Score: 0, Troll

    Treat them like the Palestinians Sharon is attacking. No need to bother with a trial or judge or lawyers, it is much faster to just bomb them with an AH-64 Apache helicopter and then say to TV "they were terrorists". It's not like Palestinians peoples deserve the right to a fair trial or something...

    1. Re:Other solution by perlyking · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Well, when palestinians choose to attack israel the israeli army blows shit up and executes people in retaliation.
      Imagine if the rest of the world responding like that for this attack. :(

      --
      no sig.
    2. Re:Other solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes I feel so sorry for the 150million arabs being pushed around by the 15million jews. Poor arabs.

  109. Sad... by Lethyos · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm sorry, doing something stupid when you're 18 does not justify academic and professional murder nor is it suicide in those respects. You're going way too far overboard in your idea of what consitutes punishment for my offenses.

    First of all, I was a paying student. The money I put into the university system there made those machines run. I had vested interest, so that lessens the severity of the intrusion. If you trespass somewhere on a college campus, as a student, they don't convict you of a felony. They realize you're a college student and you're not only stupid, you're probably just goofing around. They slap you on the wrist, send you home. End of story. They do not kick you out then tell the rest of the world what you did so that no other schools accept you.

    Your opinion here is so utterly absurd that it baffles me how someone so intelligent would believe that it makes sense to destroy a person's entire life over a minor offense. Punishment is supposed to correct someone's way to conforming their behavior within the laws. Punishment is not supposed to ruin a person. I suppose your parent's never said "it's for your own good" when they administered a spanking?

    The FBI was poised to destroy my life in countless conceivable ways. If I cannot acquire an education and hence live a professional career as a computer scientist, there's not much else I could do at this point. The life I have always wanted would be unreachable. So I cost the university a few man hours patching a few systems that had obvious security holes. I'm sure they made some student do the patching (which I informed the admins needed to be done, which is how I got caught - go benevolence) for free.

    The justice system is supposed to balance the punishment with the offense because it is supposed to (as I previously mention) help offenders correct their ways. You do not execute someone for stealing a loaf of bread.

    Maybe if you had the experiences I had in the whole situation, you would not hold this silly right-wing extremist viewpoint that believes punishment for every crime is death by sodomy. What I ended up getting was still too much to fit the crime, in not only my opinion, but in the opinions of people much more rational than yourself. (One of my laywers included, who managed to get one of the guys the university to admit, over the phone, that they wanted to make an example out of me by going overboard.)

    Oh well... there's just too much I can say here and I know this is a lost cause. I should quit before I fall too far behind in the face of ignorance. Since you show me the discourtesy of defending injustice, I can only respond with the hope that one day you find yourself on the wrong end of an FBI prosecution. Maybe then you'll understand.

    --
    Why bother.
    1. Re:Sad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This was almost certainly during the 1980's or early 1990's. Sanity did not reign during that time. If you have broken into a building and simply walked around, then the campus police would be investigating. For beating up somebody, you would get a misdamenor. for driving drunk, you get expensive bill from lawyers and some points, but you are allowed off.
      For walking around in a virtual world, your are to be sent to prison??? Unfortunatly, there is a grave misjustice in our society(USA) that says to do more harm to those that can hurt the ones in power. Now adays, all of our rights and liberties are heading out the door.
      Sorry to hear about you episode.

    2. Re:Sad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I'm sorry, doing something stupid when you're 18 does not justify academic and professional murder nor is it suicide in those respects. You're going way too far overboard in your idea of what consitutes punishment for my offenses.

      Bullshit. An 18 year old has a fully develop awareness of right and wrong, both legally and ethically.

      First of all, I was a paying student. The money I put into the university system there made those machines run. I had vested interest, so that lessens the severity of the intrusion. If you trespass somewhere on a college campus, as a student, they don't convict you of a felony. They realize you're a college student and you're not only stupid, you're probably just goofing around. They slap you on the wrist, send you home. End of story. They do not kick you out then tell the rest of the world what you did so that no other schools accept you.

      Bullshit. Just because you are a "paying student," that does not entitle you to ravage the place as you see fit. I don't care if you gave them a billion dollars, private property laws are still in effect.

      The FBI was poised to destroy my life in countless conceivable ways. If I cannot acquire an education and hence live a professional career as a computer scientist, there's not much else I could do at this point. The life I have always wanted would be unreachable. So I cost the university a few man hours patching a few systems that had obvious security holes. I'm sure they made some student do the patching (which I informed the admins needed to be done, which is how I got caught - go benevolence) for free.

      See, here's the fundamental problem: you think the world owes you the right to fulfill your dreams, so that's how you justify your actions. Again, Bullshit. Go join the legions of people flipping burgers at McDonalds. There are literally billions of people in this world who never see their dreams fulfilled, what makes you so special?

      As someone in IT management, I can tell you right now, I wouldn't hire you. Not because you had an "incident" when you were 18, but because you aren't enough of a man to accept responsibility for your actions.

    3. Re:Sad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First of all, I was a paying student. The money I put into the university system there made those machines run. I had vested interest, so that lessens the severity of the intrusion. If you trespass somewhere on a college campus, as a student, they don't convict you of a felony. They realize you're a college student and you're not only stupid, you're probably just goofing around. They slap you on the wrist, send you home. End of story. They do not kick you out then tell the rest of the world what you did so that no other schools accept you.

      Amazing how you can plead "ignorance" so eloquently and thoroughly. Here's a news flash for ya, you can't plead "ignorance" and then give some transcendent answer as to why you're ignorant.

      What a fucking con artist.

    4. Re:Sad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're a moron

    5. Re:Sad... by Lethyos · · Score: 2

      Why? Are 18 years NOT adults? They are, they should have all the privelages and all the responsibilities of the rest of the world. You admitted you broke the rules. You should be punished under the law when you break the rules. Can 18 years old not understand that? I am 20, and I can understand that. Why are you so different (well, back then, why were you so different?).

      Yes, I certainly agree that a person should be punished if they break the law. I am not an anarchist. If you had actually read my post, you would have realized that I am talking about the punishment not fitting the crime. The punishment for computer crime is far overblown, I suspect because people (read: lawmakers) are still afraid of it. They do not understand it. We see countless other severe offenders like murderers and rapists get off their crimes with on average 1.5-2.5 year sentences. Many computer crimes see offenders get as many as five years or more! Is that justice? I think you oughta rethink your blind faith in supporting our justice system. Murder deserves jail time and a lot of it. Harmlessly poking around in a system does not. And again, maybe one day you'll understand, and perhaps even think for yourself without believing what the Man tells you verbatim. (News Flash! Computer crime is not worse than killing someone!)

      You deserve it. You admit that it was wrong. You admit that you shouldn't have done it. Yet you suffered no consequences. Therefore no justice was served.

      I never said it was wrong. I performed a valuable service to my university by informing them of a serious problem. I did say I was stupid because at the time, I thought my actions would be recognized as useful. As for suffeirng no consequences, you're full of it. I got fined out the ass and served probation for a year. Not to mention having my computer equipment destroyed (several thousand dollars worth was shipped back to me in boxes w/o any packaging). I was punished, but in great excess. Do you understand what it means to do something to excess?

      I said before and I said now: I do not care the end result of the punishment. Whether or not your life is ruined after accepting the consequences is irrelevant to me. That is entirely up to you. Punishments hurt. Thats the name of the game.

      Yes, punishment hurts, but punishment is useless if it ruins the potential your life holds. Did your parents, when they spanked you, intend for your future career options to be eliminated? No. They wanted to correct your ways to keep you on a path of success. By going so overboard, the FBI would have ruined my academic and professional careers if we hadn't gotten the offense reduced. What good would that have done? Our country doesn't need more burger flippers or uneducated people. It needs less of both! You still miss the point! YOU DON'T EXECUTE SOMEONE FOR STEALING A LOAF OF BREAD!


      Again, what a load of crap. To begin, being a paying student is irrelevant. Can I hack the public utilities since they are public? Could my father kill me because he created me, and paid for me to be raised, and raised me? That is no mitigation. That actually makes it worse: you admit you had a vested interest yet you still acted poorly; it was community property (paid for in part by thousands of other students! what about their interests!) and you mistreated it.


      First off, you're still blowing this out of proportion. I compromised a few non-vital systems on a college network of a school I attended, and let the admins know how I did it and how to fix it to boot. This is not on the same grounds as a father murdering his own son. Repeat after me: "computer cracking is not as bad as murder". It is not even close. If a parent murders their own child, that's a criminal act and should be severely punished because it is a severe offense. Duh. If a student cracks a system belonging to his university, he at worst, deserves a small fine and his network access pivaledge revoked. That would have been more than enough punishment. Ending my academic career and spoiling mine, or anyone's professional possiblities over such a small matter is absurd.

      Well, this is a waste of time and I am going to end it here. Continuing to read your post, it's clear that you either didn't read what I wrote, or you are unable to comprehend it. I don't care what the law says, I'm talking about the absurdity of it! The law is wrong. It was made by people who are afraid of computer technology and think that "hackers" will bring down our nation if they go unchecked. Sorry, but that is completely wrong. Crimes that hurt people are wrong. Computer crimes that take down networks and cause extensive outages are also wrong. Neither of these are things I did. I didn't write Red Code and prevent thousands of people from gaining network access. I didn't prevent network access for anyone! No harm done. The university would have saved a LOT time and money if they would have just fixed the problem and talked to me about it. Addressing me on the issue in a civilized and appropriate manner would not only have corrected my ways, it would have made me retain respect for the university and the legal system. Plus, I probably would have gotten to interact with some really bright techies. Instead, I got to interact with two FBI agents bent on ending me. But that won't convince you, I'm sure.

      You're more interested in seeing lives destroyed than seeing people learn. Punishment is meaningless if it doesn't teach someone something about what they've done. If you're going to punish someone so severely that they cannot continue to function in any positive sense afterwards, you might as well have killed them in the first place.

      --
      Why bother.
    6. Re:Sad... by Penis · · Score: 1

      Whoa, dude. Maybe it's time for you to move to afghanistan so you can dole out justice to the criminals.
      (You know, stoning women, choppin' off hands, all that fun stuff. Sounds like it'd be right up your unresolved-issues alley.)

      I hear they need some new people over there, with all the bombs dropping and such.

      Mr. pen!s

    7. Re:Sad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Danheskett, you're an idiot.

      Put things in perspective and realise the punishment should always fit the crime.

      Dumbass.

    8. Re:Sad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      you would have realized that I am talking about the punishment not fitting the crime. The punishment for computer crime is far overblown, I suspect because people (read: lawmakers) are still afraid of it. They do not understand it.

      The difficulty distinguishing between breaking into a computer and breaking into the U's museum is the difficulty in determining what actually happened. If you get caught in the museum with a pair of Renoirs under your arm, it's pretty clear what's going on. If you get caught poking around the bursar's computer, it's not clear if you're there looking, marking your tuition "paid", changing your grades, or stealing other people's social security numbers. It is for this reason, that many of the laws are written harshly. You, of course, were just perusing through "innocently," but how is anyone really supposed to differentiate between you and your suite-mate, who was downloading the recipe for Coca-Cola?

  110. We must now bomb Irael by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    The new US Patriot Act (HR 3162) makes creating and spreading virus and worms an act of terrorism. As such King George must require extradition of the offending youths and hold a military tribulan. If israel refuses to give up these kids, then we must bomb Israel at a cost of $1 billion dollars per month to US taxpayers as punishment for harboring terrorists. We must make sure to hit any buildings with big red crosses on them and then deny it. We must kill many civilians and deny it and when US soldiers get killed, we muist blame it on friendly fire.

    1. Re:We must now bomb Irael by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not funny, it's true. Dont make it up as funny, if you want to moderate it, it's probably insightful. These kids are terroirsts, and as such, we should have them extracted to the US, and sent to militrary tribunals, and swiftly executed. They have caused billions of dollars worth of loss to the US economy.

  111. the bright side by nonane · · Score: 1

    i havn't seen anyone looking at the bright side of this. The script kiddies/worm writters exploit vulnerabilities in the software, plus through social engineering.

  112. How do they get traced ? by Graspee_Leemoor · · Score: 1

    Like other people here, I once thought it would be cool to write a virus. The trouble is that I *still* think it would be cool.

    Now before you get all uppity, I should tell you that the effects of my virus would be something like hooking all the text output apis and doing the equiv. of s/icrosoft/icro$oft/g.

    The reason I think it would feel good is an expansion of the reason programming is good. Programming is good because you are creating something and feeling ubercool because you had an effect on the computer (at its most basic). Now imagine having that effect on *lots* of computers all over the world. You see?

    Also when I say "write a virus" I mean old-school style, written in x86 asm. It's lame trick getting users to spread the code through email- you should write some little app that is so cool people will actually spread it for you.

    The reason I have never done this is because the authors of viruses and worms always seem to get caught. But how? Is it because they put messages in their vbscript source which can be traced to handles of known people ? I don't see how working out where the virus was first uploaded to is any help, especially if someone anonymously ftpd it somewhere while using a spoofed ip...

    These kids apparently confessed- a foolish move but one that can be blamed on the intimidation they faced while still young.

    graspee

    1. Re:How do they get traced ? by Dante'sPrayer · · Score: 1

      Well, the virus seems to have been written on Visual Basic. I would not be very surprised if the 'compiler' (how should we call it?) had embedded data of the owner of the program. Remember how the copyright was present on Sircam, along with the compiler path?

    2. Re:How do they get traced ? by damiam · · Score: 1

      I believe the virus was written in Visual Basic Script, an interpeted language that doesn't have a compiler. A VBS file is simply an ASCII text file.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    3. Re:How do they get traced ? by Dante'sPrayer · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the screensaver itself must have been written on something more complex than that. That is what I meant. Quoting the Symantec page, "W32.Goner.A@mm is a mass-mailing worm that is written in Visual Basic "; not Visual Basic Script. Not having a copy myself, I cannot make the adecuate testing; but if someone can, please run 'strings' over the screensaver binary and publish the findings.

    4. Re:How do they get traced ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a similiar idea.
      Only it would have something to do with turning default searching in MS Explorer to no searching on the taskbar and change the default homepage to www.opera.com instead of MSN.
      That and changing the default email client to NULL.
      I can dream...

  113. 5 years for every stupid user by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    give five years of prison to every stupid user who clicked on the attachment. OK, the prisons would be overcrowded, but this is the only real solution to the problem: once all idiots are in prison, no worm can ever spread again.

  114. Users are not at fault here by lateral · · Score: 1

    If the message is not getting through to your users then it's time to change the message.

    My guess is that, in the main, the people where you work are bright, professional people who have proven themselves well capable of learning. So why do they have a blind spot around this lesson? Same reason anyone has a learning blind spot - poor teaching.

  115. 5 years for a virus! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    5 years for a virus!

    Take that in perspektive to what happens every
    day in Israel, and never even goes to court.

  116. Re: Linux wouldn't let a 'user' cripple the system by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

    you're right you would lose lots of personal data, but the system would still be there.

    me.. lecture about backups?

    my idea of a backup is moving it to my second drive... which is no protection at all.

  117. Further proof that BSD is the future by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ph34r.

  118. Preview Virii?! by Tony.Tang · · Score: 1

    I didn't read the details about this one too carefully, but I was under the impression that the Goner virus had a great thing going for it: just by _previewing_ the message, the virus would launch. I also believe (i.e. foot in mouth comment forthcoming) that there was another virus previously that worked just by previewing. This means that not even opening the message, but just by clicking on it, so that it would go to the preview pane was sufficient.

    If this were all the case, then I think we're in for a whole new round of education. Think about it -- not only can you not open attachments, but you can't even preview the message! Seriously, I think I'm a pretty email-virus savvy kind of guy -- I don't open attachments (period), but if it means that I can't even read the message, then things are going to be bad for me.

    Is this the case, or am I just smoking dope?

    1. Re:Preview Virii?! by starbasessd · · Score: 1

      KAK is among the virii that only needs to be previewed in Outlook or Outlook Express, don't even need to open it. Proof of concept is one thing, I'd buy them a bottle of their favorite beverage. Accidental release into the wild is bad, but excrement occurs. Malicious, malevolent payloads is something else entirely.

  119. Yes! AND Punishment for CIOs/CTOs by Greyfox · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Writing and releasing a virus, worm or trojan is just as much an act of vandalism as if you'd gone out and smashed peoples' windows in. And you can smash a lot of windows with the Internet. No pun intended for this particular metaphor.

    The question that never gets asked is why all these companies were vulnerable to these attacks. I've worked for several Fortune 500 companies and I've yet to see one with good security. You'd think they'd be going out and hiring a bunch of security professionals after Sept 11 but I'm not seeing a whole lot for infosec or security on the job boards.

    Until some CIOs and CTOs start losing their jobs over this crap, the cycle will persist.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:Yes! AND Punishment for CIOs/CTOs by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      ...
      I've worked for several Fortune 500 companies and I've yet to see one with good security. You'd think they'd be going out and hiring a bunch of security professionals after Sept 11 but I'm not seeing a whole lot for infosec or security on the job boards.
      That's because security is not good for the bottom line. It's too expensive.
    2. Re:Yes! AND Punishment for CIOs/CTOs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I think the issue is that realistically they haven't lost very much yet. There are numbers thrown around and you can talk about lost man hours and lost this and that but the fundamental truth with businesses is that when it comes to estimating loss they are always going to estimate high and you can't easily point to a case of a business being ravaged but a worm or virus. (I'm think along the lines of IP being distributed to an enemy or serious amounts of data lost, not a few engineers couldn't get on the web or send email for a couple days.


      I've worked for a number of fortune 500 companies and where security really matters, across the board, it was there. In most places they assume that the employees are on their side and that it's a friendly environment and if they use good practices (backup regularly, lock cabinets and drawers, etc.) the worst something like Goner is ever going to do is waste a few hours which your people are going to waste anyways if you really pay attention.

  120. The solution... by Quazion · · Score: 1

    Write an E-mail that explains why not to open atachments like you normaly tell them, then put an attachment on it which says i_am_not_a_virus.exe or something which does something like the following, open a popupbox which reads: when you press 'OK' your computer will forward this email to all the people in the adress book and then trash your computer... ( and dont add a cancel box....ofcourse )

    Loads of people will press OK, and there computer
    will be dead, all their information gone...some will learn and some wont....

    Quazion.

  121. Re: software prostitution ? by guybarr · · Score: 1

    software PROSTITUTION ?

    I knew I shouldn't get the patch from that woman ... :)

    and on another note, prostitution is not illeagal in israel, but women-slavery (yes, thats SLAVERY, including kidnapping, being raped serially ten times a day, beating and sometimes murder) certainly is.
    but like you said, the police is streched out as it is trying to protect us from those maniacs exploding in our streets, it usually doesn't have enough time to handle women-slavery.

    --
    Working for necessity's mother.
  122. Seeding by Anarchofascist · · Score: 1
    I think you should "seed" the email system with emails with a nghtyboy.exe attachment. When it's run, nghtybox.exe can assume that the person sitting in front of the screen is the kind of person who mindlessly runs attachments. You could write the program to:
    • send an identifying message to a central server
    • run a tutorial on why you shouldn't run attachments, who seds them, a little history, etc.
    • Which attachments are relatively safe (.jpg, .gif etc)
    • Anything else (like change their startup screen to say "Remember, only YOU can prevent Outlook Worms")
    --
    Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more, Or close the wall up with our American dead!
  123. Re:at least IT is paid by the hour. by wackybrit · · Score: 1

    Did you ever hear of Joan of Arc? She was only 16 when she managed to rally France to defeat the English. Sure, not 15, but 15 year olds are no more powerful now than they ever were.

  124. Arafat at fault by GnulixRulz · · Score: 1
    In a reaction to the arrest of four Israeli teenagers in connection with the release of the "Goner" virus, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon stated that Palestinian Authority chairman Yassir Arafat was solely at fault "for corrupting the youth of the nation to commit acts of information warfare. Ceterum censeo, Palestina delenda est!"

    Five Palestinian police stations were destroyed by helicopter rocket fire in a retaliatory attack.

  125. Definitely true... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The maximum penalty for rape in Israel is, I think,
    20 years. But I haven't heard of any rapist who spent a net time of more than a year and a half in jail.
    most get a few months or community work.
    It's so bad because this is really a bad offense,
    much worse than white collar.
    Besides, police are hunting down white collar criminals in a crusade manner. A lot of politicians are under a close inspection of the police (and that is certainly a good thing, though I think my country should get it's priorities straight...)

  126. assail the practice not the concept by Erris · · Score: 2
    The reason given for hiring these guys was not to find out actual damages, but to jack up the cleanup costs into a range where the hit qualified as a felony.

    How do you know the motive? Did they say that themselves? If they did a judge should have spanked them. If they did it because they lacked the time or competence to asses the damages themselves, the cost should be passed on. I can't tell from here.

    That's why we have courts and civil law. An unbiased third party is supposed to take care of things like this. Abuses of the system do not make the system evil any more than computer abuses make programing evil.

    With that in mind, those four should be made to pay. It does not matter that they can not afford it. They can suffer for their the wrong they did. This happens all the time. Losers are often reduced to poverty for thinking like this. "Duh, I don't have nothing to lose, so what?" Wrong, you always have something to lose.

    All of that is beside the point, however. I'm just wondering where all the John Ashcoft fans are.

    --
    DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
  127. This wouldnt be an issue ... by Err0r_404 · · Score: 1

    But for some reason noone updates their virus definitions. I work for a Networking Company and we install Antigen AV on every Exchange server that we sell (It uses 5 different scanners + a worm list). Automatically updates the virus defs. Voila, no problem anymore. Did those clients have any problems, nope. Anyway, enough ranting.

  128. Script Kiddies Do do damage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I personally beleave that they should get the full sentence for their crime. Although I laugh everytime a virus hits the Net becuase I am usising a Unix system so it is genereally virus protected and free. But the fact that you can make a damaging program dosent give you the permission to. So what if a company has a hole in their security. It dosent give people permission to break in to their computer and change things around. The Excuse of These people should have better security dosent make their act any less wrong. The Goner virus dose a lot of damage. How much Money and time was lost Fixing and backing up the system? This money may have gone onto better things possibly more charatable or into someting that can save lives. I have met a lot of thse Script Kiddies and they just make me want to kick them hard (although I dont because I know it is wrong to hurt people), they think they are the greatest programers in the world and that can do do anything. They are in to make themselfs look like a person with super powers which people would fear and respect. These are people who think that have more power then they actually do and NEED to be humbled.

  129. Re:Attachment blocking at the server [PLUG] by ryanvm · · Score: 2
    Okay, that works well for Exchange but what about 80% of the mail servers out there, which are not Exchange servers?

    That's why I wrote batemail. It does exactly what you describe only it works on *nix based hosts. Any attachment that has one of the "taboo" extensions is automagically removed from the email and a notice put in its place.

    You'd be amazed how many of these attachments we're stripping out on a daily basis where I work.

  130. Re:hmm by RedWolves2 · · Score: 1

    Oh come on you guys this was funnier then hell. I read this over here I laughed my ass off when I read it.

  131. Who by jaavaaguru · · Score: 1

    Yet another annoying worm comes and goes, wasting countless IT hours

  132. Who's Wasting Time? by jaavaaguru · · Score: 1

    Yet another annoying worm comes and goes, wasting countless IT hours

    If the Admins secured their systems properly, nobody would be wasting any time fixing problems they allowed to happen through their own incompetence.

    I'm saying that as an admin of a small network. I would be ashamed of myself if I was having to spend lots of time fixing things that were messed up by a worm.

    Perhaps the admins involved in things like this should be subject to the opposite of Christmas Bonuses. They should loose out on part of their pay packet at the end of the year for not doing their job properly.

    When will people learn to use secure systems and to apply all the latest patches and use all the latest virus detection, both server (eg. Mail server, etc) and client side (if it's Windows clients). I could recommend QMail as a mail server that is very good at checking for viruses - or use one of the many hacks for sendmail that filter out nasty looking things. If you must use Exchange, use it as an *INTERNAL* server, and have all mail coming in from outside be filtered by a more secure system first. It's common sense really.

  133. virus training by TotallyUseless · · Score: 2

    here is what i do... every few months, make a hotmail account or something unrecognized by your staff. Mail them your own 'virus' that simply says 'You shouldn't open unknown attachments. If this was a real virus, your IT staff would be punching you in the face right now"

    --

    Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!
  134. Same old shit, so train your users by Recluse · · Score: 1

    I agree with most of what you say - that blame cannot be placed squarely on the shoulders of those who run these worms and virii, but with a minor caveat: If you work in IT, and are responsible for cleaning up the mess when something like this goes around, instruct and train. I geek for a 30 person office. While we do have trouble, occasionally, with a worm being passed around through Outlook, it is not much. The 'Code Red' nonsense helped a great deal with this... the users saw _on the evening news_ what horrible things could be done to their box, and how much time they would lose. At that point, the mantra I went on about - "Save and scan attachments. Don't open attachments unless you are expecting them. 'Cool' forwards are not cool." - sunk home for many. They preach to each other.

    Likewise, my mother at her office - she being the typical Joe Schmo computer user smirked at here in slashdot - has slowly trained those working with her. If they want her to open an attachment sent through email, they'll send warning. Else it gets deleted.

    Train and teach instead of ranting.

    --Recluse

    --
    Look ma, I'm a .sig
  135. No problems here by AaronW · · Score: 2

    At the company I work for we've had very little trouble in terms of viruses and worms. Then again, they banned Outlook long ago. Whenever someone does manage to get hit, IT sends out a broadcast email warning everyone and telling everyone that this user was using banned software. A guy a couple cubes away ran Outlook and got hit with one of the worms. IT was there within minutes and immediately uninstalled Outlook, pulled the network connection, and left a nice note for the guy when he returned the next day.

    It's too bad other companies don't wake up and just fix the problem to begin with... ban Outlook.

    --
    This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
  136. The blame game... by BlackArrow · · Score: 1

    IMHO the software and OS that allow these things to bring down email servers and allow dumb users to cause havok are at fault. The issue is that Outlook and Windows are full of "features" which are designed with no thought to security at all.

    --
    "If you only knew the POWER of the DARK SIDE!"
    1. Re:The blame game... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The blame does not lay with the software developers IMO. The users ask for feature, they get features. As far as I'm concerned, the security of a system is down to the IT department, forgive me, but isn't that what were employeed for in part?

      As with most worms, they are in the form of an executable file, be is SCR, PIF, VBS. IT Pro's (and I use that term lightly) need to ask themselves why users would need to be sent such files. THEY DON'T!! So, the answer is simple, block these kinds of attachements, and 98% of your virus problems are solved....... it's a 2 minute job, and there is NO EXCUSE!!

  137. Administrative detention by pyrotic · · Score: 1

    Under existing Israeli anti-terror laws, they can be held for 6 months without trial. Administrative Detention can be renewed for a further 6 months with the signature of a judge. Though as they aren't Arabs the police probably will be lenient.

  138. Good, lil' bastards. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope the Israelis string them up and flog their genitals. Nothing like a good gential flogging to straighten out pesky individuals.

    Look at how great it has worked on the Slashdot crew!

  139. Some Users Pass Em Around On Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some of the folks at my previous employer would receive suspicious trojan horse attachments in the mail and purposely forward them to people in the office they didn't like. When interrogated they would play dumb, saying their computer was infected but they found an antiviral on the internet and ran it so that's why their computer is completely clean. After work around beers they'd fess up and we'd all laugh-- except for the poor admin, who, if he was sober, would plan a little personal sporadic-workstation sabotage.

  140. Assign blame. by Dog+and+Pony · · Score: 1

    I am usually opposed to pointing people out in public, but this is kind of a special case.

    The idea would be simple:

    Keep a track on who clicks on the files, sending out the virus.

    First time, talk with them thouroughly, explaining why this is a bad idea.

    Second time, tell everyone who did it, make them feel really stupid. Yes, you are sacrificing a few, but all of them will learn.

    I wish I had a better method, but withoud going total nazi on the employees, I don't know what else would work.

  141. The "red herring" defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Thank you for that insightful, yet totally meaningless argument.

  142. It is M$ fault!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is it the kids fault that MS continues to distrubute broken security/software models?

  143. Kids OS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, if you run a kids OS, then you can expect to get burned by kids playing with viruses, can't you?

  144. Re:You know it's entirely possible to disable that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    executable content?

    does that include Word macros in *.doc files?

  145. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  146. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  147. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  148. Re:at least IT is paid by the hour. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Somebody doesn't understand moderating. I posted that when the parent was (Score:1). It wasn't a post to the main story, it was a post to the comment. His comment was insightful, so I don't see how it's offtopic to tell him that, if he's checking for replies on his comment.

    Not that the Karma is the issue, it's not. But I'm going to go metamoderate now and I hope I see a stupid mod like yours so I can call it unfair.

    Why waste your time modding down stuff that's within a thread when you could be using your mod points modding up stuff that's it's own comment? And please, it was one line, it's not like it takes up that much space on the screen.

  149. Operator error is a design parameter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In my real life, I service refrigeration equipment. It comes with a whole lot of different control packages, components etc. It is somewhat fussy in operation. But, I will not use products that will not withstand abuse. Why?

    Let me explain. Even a well designed system will eventually run into situations outside of it's design parameters. If everything is built on the edge, any slight mistake, change in environment, or whatever will cause the thing to stop working. And that means lost time, product, or whatever. So I use stuff, and design system with plenty of slop.

    Those complaining about users are being ridiculous. I am an experienced mechanic, and I know very well how many mistakes I have made. I know how to fix them, so they don't become well known. I also know that when it is very hot, or very busy, I cannot be expected to be 100% all the time. I will make stupid mistakes. OPERATOR ERROR IS A DESIGN PARAMETER.

    For example, digital controls. I have run into products that require field service (this in filthy environments, lying on your back in the dark) with static free environments. They work on the bench, but not in the field. I don't use them because other products are available that are tough and work in these environments. They can be hot plugged, screwed up, abused, and still work. The manufacturer can say operator error all they want, but I say stuff it, and will tear their garbage out and use something else.

    Those on this list that are blameing users for the problems are really missing the point. If a 15 yr old can bring down a software infrastructure so easily, the software infrastructure is seriously broken.

    These are not internet virii, or worms, these are Microsoft software bugs.

    Derek

  150. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  151. Re:at least IT is paid by the hour. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My Evolution client, which I've used since the first beta appeared, is designed to prevent such irritating things from happening. Images embedded in HTML mail do not show automatically, preventing spam-fuckers from knowing that I just opened their mail, and it contains no backdoor to my OS like VB-script. The fact is that all Unix mail clients treat attachments as text files, and not an executable, saving even stupid users from themselves.

    The problem with Microsoft is that it designs its shitware for CxO morons who think that the business community requires immediate play access to boring flash jokes ridden with sexism , racism and homophobia.

    Anybody that buys or uses pirated Microsoft products from OS to browser to mail client deserves what they get, including their IT department. IT expenses fixing the weekly virus/trojan horse attacks should have been figured in advance when the CxO made the stupid decision to use them.

    If anything Microsoft should be liable for any expenditures related to their pathetic software. If you release a faulty product you should be made to pay for that decision.

    !

  152. bleh, double bleh, triple bleh by The+Living+Fractal · · Score: 1

    If your 'company' was smart they'd have a firewall up that prevented Goner from EVER GETTING INSIDE THE NETWORK IN THE FIRST PLACE YOU MORONS.

    Any company with a large enough network that gets Goner through email attachments is a laughing stock. The IT dept of that company would have to be grossly negligent in their duties to keep the network secure before Goner could EVER GET PAST THE FIREWALL.

    So I read all these people talking about "when goner hit" or whatever. I laugh at you, you pitiful fools.

    --
    I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
  153. Re:at least IT is paid by the hour. by theancient2 · · Score: 1

    These don't cripple entire systems, either. (yet)

    But on Linux, you could still send someone an email starting with "I thought you'd like this new game I found... please run it." And people would run it. And it would email itself to everyone in .addressbook. Or whatever.

    It's not as easy to do -- but it's those same usability issues that keep most people from Linux in the first place. (Make anything easy to use, it will probably make it easier to screw up, too.)

  154. Re: Linux wouldn't let a 'user' cripple the system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    They can still use all the apps, they just lost all the stuff they did with them.
    And which would you rather do -- re-install your applications, or re-write that 50-page report you were working on and didn't get around to backing up yet today.
  155. Terrorist States by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just more evidence that Israel is a terrorist state itself, raising and harbouring youth who commit such atrocisties against the world! But I bet Israel PM Sharon is wishing the four script kiddies were of Palestine blood so he can have another excuse to carry out his personal terrorist attacks on the people of Palestine and their land!

  156. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  157. I wonder, who taught em to write worms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and should he be punished, their culture is dangerous!

  158. Re:I can't belive people are still falling for thi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just for the record, that's a CDW commercial (they sell computer stuff, natch).

    Can't seem to get to AdCritic today to see if it's there. But it's a great ad, the point being, "Our account managers are experienced in normal IT problems, blah, blah, blah."

    It does include other gems like:

    "Bob, I sent an email about the email being down."

    "Well, Bob, looks like you're going to have to pull another all-nighter."

    "What's the matter, Bob, we're only asking the impossible!!"

    (I have no affiliation with CDW, I just think it's a decent commercial.)

    Glenn

  159. Re:I was young once and needed money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rough deal. But hey, you've had two girlfriends. That's two more than me.

  160. Crime to work on MS Systems? by ytsejam-ppc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm tired of people making apologies for not working as linux administrators or open source programmers. There are a goodly number of people in this world who make a living writing code for whichever system the managers deem fit, and a goodly number of administrators who administer a network full of whatever operating systems the business deems fit for survival. Why don't you wear your job with pride and be thankful that you are employed. There are others who aren't so lucky.

    1. Re:Crime to work on MS Systems? by Your_Mom · · Score: 1

      Apparently I need humor delimiters. I have no problem working with MS systems, and I am quite happy where I am. At home I use Linux. I just usually use that line when I am at my LUG and we swap war stories back and forth. Take a joke people!

      --
      Objects in the blog are closer then they ap
    2. Re:Crime to work on MS Systems? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm tired of people making apologies for not working as linux administrators or open source programmers.

      I'm tired of knuckle-dragging zealots with no idea how much political bullshit goes on in real business.

      There are a goodly number of people in this world who make a living writing code for whichever system the managers deem fit, and a goodly number of administrators who administer a network full of whatever operating systems the business deems fit for survival.

      And there are just as many, if not more people who have to put up with decisions motivated by office politics instead of technical knowledge. Or do you perhaps live in a fantasyland where management actually knows what they're talking about?

      Why don't you wear your job with pride and be thankful that you are employed. There are others who aren't so lucky.

      Maybe some of us *do* our jobs with pride and make do with what we're forced to use. We like being employed, after all, and humiliating the powers that be or going against their wishes is not a good career move.

      Fucking idiot. Get your head out of your ass.

    3. Re:Crime to work on MS Systems? by Y+B+MCSE · · Score: 1

      And there are just as many, if not more people who have to put up with decisions motivated by office politics instead of technical knowledge. Or do you perhaps live in a fantasyland where management actually knows what they're talking about?

      I work at a place where the view seems to be "If linux was worthwhile, they would have commercials and more marketing. I know the feeling of the above, to have someone who really doesn't know what an OS is or what it does tell you why Windows is superior and then ask in the same breath if you can reinstall the printers on his XP machine because they all dissappeared.

      I am proud to work, proud of the stuff I do but I lament that all my servers are NT and Unixware.

  161. Kinda... by Snover · · Score: 1

    I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but the fact remains that this worm DID carry a payload which was totally unnecessary. If they wanted to play with code and see how propagated they could get something, or whatever the hell they were thinking, they shouldn't have put anything malicious in there. But they did. As far as the analogous rantings of slackergod goes, the email included with the attachment (yeah, that's backasswards, but don't blame me) didn't say "DON'T OPEN THIS, IT'S A VIRUS!" It's more analogous to, for example, your mother telling you to not jump in puddles, but the puddle is right THERE.
    I listened to my mom like a good kid. Besides, puddles make you wet, and I don't like being wet.

    --

    [insert witty comment here]
  162. Only if IT has teeth. by devphil · · Score: 2
    Personally, I always liked the "drill" approach. The IT guys occasionally create a Hotmail account or some such, and mail something cool-looking to a few random accounts at the company. If you run the attachment, it pops up a simple message on your screen informing you that if this had been real,[...]

    Unfortunately, that assumes your IT dept actually has the power to do something about stupid lusers.

    I work on a U.S. military base, and while some of these viruses are caught by the filters on the Exchange server[*], they pose enough of a risk that once, the base IT folks sent out a "drill" email. This one sent the user to an internal webpage which threw out some technical-sounding gibberish -- NOBODY in the whole damn WORLD is as good as the U.S. military at generating technical-sounding gibberish -- and asked the user for their username/password.

    Which they've been told repeatedly not to do. Those who entered it got a huge flashing warning sign, their username was recorded in a "morons" list, and an announcement went out the next week saying that the morons in question would have to submit a 100-word essay on why they should be allowed to continue to have access to the computer network, given that they're (apparently) willing to hand out access to any random webpage.

    Cool, huh? 'Cept that some of the N-star generals with more stars than neurons were on that moron list, and of course they have way too much pride to be explaining to anybody why they should be permitted to do whatever they want. So a few days after the first announcement, another announcement went out, "Never mind."

    And the morons continue to wreak havoc on the network.

    [*] Those filters are fucking stupid, I might add. Frex, the word "funny" in the subject line triggers them. We found out about this one the hard way when a user mailed us with, "The secondary RAID is acting funny."

    --
    You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
  163. Only one thing to do ... by CrazySailor · · Score: 1

    Make them part of the Government IT workforce. Protecting the rest of us from their ever younger brethren...

    --
    -- Improve Windows - Buy a Mac!
  164. Re:I can't belive people are still falling for thi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    Hahah...check out the latest article on 3pm.ca , i guess they've picked up this thread and talked about it a bit. The funny thing is, that a message like this would probably work!

  165. Except... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Windoze XP, 2000 and ME do not have add/remove for Outlook. The default install will put Outlook back if you remove it.

  166. That's not exact by Derci · · Score: 1

    Most of the home users in Israel do pirate software, but businesses do not, as they are afraid of BSA raids.

    Dunno were you lived in Israel, but I personally knew only person who pirated cable television, until his parents caught him (that was 8 years ago).

    --

    -- The ballad of arrivederci
  167. Your policy is worthless. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    The policy should be: not runnable attachments are allowed in any email. Summary elimination with a polite communication to the offender.

    If you need a legit document or attachment of any kind you either get it as plain text in the body of the email or you request that the document is sent to a company email address were somebody that knows what he/she is doing deals with attachments.

    If all of the above is not possible, immediate deinstallation of Outlook should follow (there are many email programs that are not stupid, failing all run Pine. Yes, Pine) or being kind to MS, upgrade to their latest offering that seems to have some common sense security default settings (I don't know about this, I stopped to use their crapware email programs long time ago)..

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  168. Blame the victim. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    In the days before seat belts we should have blamed reckless drivers for crashing their cars and breaking their neck while driving their cars at 10mph....

    We should also blame the idiots that die in buildings without fire exits (they should have known it was dangerous to work there, right?)

    Or perhaps those people in Chernobyl should be blamed for the horrific birth defects of their children. They should have known that to live in proximitity (all of Ukraine in this case) to a nuclear plant was dangerous and avoided by all means.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  169. That is not virus training, it is window dressing by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    If your users can open unchecked attachments with a double click of the mouse then your policies are lax and need fixing. Insulting the very people that you are suppossed to help is the worst policy I can imagine.

    The IT professional is there to serve other people, not to make fun at their expense. Users should be able to do damage to themselves only after they go through enough steps to ensure it was done completely and knowingky in purpose.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  170. Dumb A$$ SYSADMINS!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you ever heard of ANTIGEN??? put it on your exchage servers and you will NEVER have another virus outbreak!! Atleast not if you have your file filters set properly!!!! LINUX is not the freakin answer to all the damn worlds problems you fucking morons....common damn sense is by far better!! fuckin linux loving cock suckers... I get so goddamn tired of hearing and reading your bullshit. the only way linux will ever be worth a shit is if Microsoft releases their own version of it!

    1. Re:Dumb A$$ SYSADMINS!! by josephmerlynbath · · Score: 1

      thank you for your very insightful response, anonymous coward.

      P.S. COCK! SHIT! FUCK!

    2. Re:Dumb A$$ SYSADMINS!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oooh....you can use really intelligent 4 letter words....you MUST be a linux user!!! PS tell you mom and sister I said HI!

  171. This is terrorism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yup. and this time it's not the arabs that are spreading terror.

  172. Proper punishment by zangdesign · · Score: 1

    would include jail time and at least some attempt at repayment for losses. Unfortunately, they are in a hacker-friendly country who just happens to be one of our "allies" in the "war on terror".

    More than likely, it will just go away and they will get a slap on the wrist.

    A pity, really.

    --
    To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
  173. huh? by Ionized · · Score: 1

    wtf are you talking about? Outlook doesn't "transform" anything. What, it turns non-executable, attachments into executables?

    no, it doesn't. jeez, think before you post...

    All outlook provides is an easy method of transport.

    The situation is no different than if you were mailed a package with a piece of candy in it, ate the candy, got sick, and then blamed the USPS.

    1. Re:huh? by rlowe69 · · Score: 2

      Outlook doesn't "transform" anything. What, it turns non-executable, attachments into executables?

      If I send someone a VBScript file by e-mail, someone using pine will only see the source of the file. Benign.

      In Outlook, the file will be executed. This is how Outlook virii spread. Where have you been the last 18 months?

      The situation is no different than if you were mailed a package with a piece of candy in it, ate the candy, got sick, and then blamed the USPS.

      This analogy is wrong. A proper analogy would be if someone sent you a bomb in mail and when the postman brought it and you signed for it, the postman opens it and detonates it on your front porch. The USPS would be held accountable through their employee. Just like MS should be held accountable through their software.

      Having hard drives erased, files deteled and bandwidth used up is not equivalent to 'getting sick', for a business it sometimes means nothing can get done for an entire day or more.

      IMO, MS should protect against this and be accountable for what their software does.

      --
      ----- rL
    2. Re:huh? by Ionized · · Score: 1

      If I send someone a VBScript file by e-mail, someone using pine will only see the source of the file. Benign.

      In Outlook, the file will be executed. This is how Outlook virii spread. Where have you been the last 18 months?


      i think the proper question is, "where have these people with outlook set to automatically execute scripts been the last 18 months?"

      any department with proper security measures in place have outlook set to not automatically launch scripts. it's not a complex procedure. you can no more blame microsoft for this, than you can blame microsoft if your NT web server gets r00ted by a 2-year old buffer overrun that has been fixed since sp5.

      i suppose i jumped to conclusions in assuming every sysadmin worth their salt made sure to properly configure outlook.

      however, once again, if these simple, basic precautions were not taken, then it is the admin's fault for not setting up a proper shop, or the user's fault for undoing the admin's settings.

      the situation i was discussing was a case where the user manually opens the attatchment, bungling his system up.

  174. Phew. by Goner · · Score: 1

    I knew I wasn't responsible.

  175. Unix as well Re:Fixing the staff problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trend's viruswall sofware also runs on unix, like Solaris and linux.

  176. Yes by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    Yes, it does. Everything from .doc to .htm to photoCD files.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  177. Re: Linux wouldn't let a 'user' cripple the system by ChadN · · Score: 2

    What I would like to see is some form of capability added to Linux (et. al) such that "tainted" executables can only run in a "sandbox" environment (ie. like BSD jail() ), and thus, be unable to delete my home (since it would lose write ability to all but a virtual home filesystem when run).

    Then, all files that were sent through email could be marked as "tainted" until and unless the user untaints them. Thus, even running such a file after it has been saved from an attachment would be safe.

    Obviously, there would have to be some safeguards to prevent trojans that run one way when tainted, and then delete everything when they are not. But if most things worked fine when tainted, it might be an effective strategy... Does the idea have merit?

    --
    "It's overkill, of course. But you can never have too much overkill." - Anonymous Slashdot Coward
  178. Re:You know it's entirely possible to disable that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    exchange 5.5 and exchange 2000 cannot natively filter things like attachments, you need a 3rd party product for that.

  179. Code == speech? by Ogerman · · Score: 2

    I know that's a popular viewpoint around here and one that I hold myself. But in this case, I'm not sure that viewpoint is being represented. Instead, people are discussing the degree to which these kids should be punished for their acts of lameness. A virus is just code. You can write it on a napkin as Haiku. You can print it on a t-shirt. You can represent it as a prime number. And without a vulnerable system, the virus would have no meaning, except as a random code fragment that doesn't work. In some cases, a perfectly legitimate binary (or heck, any data) for one system can be detected as a virus for another. If these kids had not initiated harmful distribution this virus, but rather published the code on a webpage along with documentation of the vulnerability, and yet somebody else turned it loose, should they still be held accountable? Or what about a good virus/worm that can be used by administrators to quickly and controllably patch up a network, but which may be harmful if released "into the wild." (I can name no examples, but it's a theoretical possibility). Kinda different way of looking at it, eh?