Slashdot Mirror
Mac Trojan Horse Disguised as Word 2004
Espectr0 writes "Macworld is alerting of a malware program for the Mac. A Macworld reader alerted the magazine to the malware after he downloaded the file from Limewire. The reader told Macworld: 'I downloaded the file in the hope that perhaps Microsoft had released some sort of public beta. The file unzipped, and to my delight the Microsoft icon looked genuine and trustworthy.' However, he added: 'I clicked on the installer file, and to my horror in 10 seconds the attachment had wiped my entire Home folder!'" This sounds similar to the recent trojan horse proof-of-concept. There are many ways to make one file look like another, on any platform. This is 2004, you should know by now not to open a file from an untrusted source.
The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
I downloaded the file in the hope that perhaps Microsoft had released some sort of public beta...I clicked on the installer file, and to my horror in 10 seconds the attachment had wiped my entire Home folder!
Maybe this is Microsoft's new security paradigm. No one can steal your data, not even you!
"Molest me not with this pocket calculator stuff."
- Deep Thought
The reader told Macworld: 'I downloaded the file in the hope that perhaps Microsoft had released some sort of public beta.
Using Limewire? A likely story.
The file unzipped, and to my delight the Microsoft icon looked genuine and trustworthy.' However, he added: 'I clicked on the installer file, and to my horror in 10 seconds the attachment had wiped my entire Home folder!'"
This is the risk you take when downloading stuff that you don't pay for. If you purchased Office 2004 from Microsoft (thus supporting the promotion and development of software for OS X), then you would have something to gripe about. As it stands, one might suggest you got what you paid for.....
This is 2004, you should know by now not to open a file from an untrusted source.
Well said. However, this does raise the possibility of other code that could be made to look like just about anything. So, once again, think about what you install on your computer just like you would think about what you eat or who you have sex with. If you don't know, trust or suspect that software/food/person, then either screen them or think twice.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
This would never of happened if they were using a secure operating system like Windows.
yeah.
Uh-huh.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a coughing fit that requires my immediate attention...
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
Let's see... You downloaded a microsoft public beta from a p2p net without checking ms's website for any existance of the beta. Then just because the icon looked like a m$ icon you figured it was safe with no virus scan? If you purchase this BEAUTIFUL florida swampland I have I bet your files will be restored and word 2004 will work fine
call me
"as plurdled gabbleblotchits on a lurgid bee" - Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz. (One man's humorous is another mans flamebait)
Because everyone knows the icon is the best way to ascertain the security and authenticity of any piece of software. It's very secure and hard to change, uh huh.
The earlier article dealt with a document file showing the wrong file type because of extension VS resource fork issues.
This is just a case of assigning a different icon to an application. Could be as simple as an rm -rf / shell script with a word icon.
Every OS is vulernable to the ultimate virus: Stupidity.Virus.a Only one release was needed.
This should be filed under the "Humans" topic as this has nothing to do with apple or even computers.
Trojan Horses are social problems -- there isn't much apple or microsoft or anyone can do other than try to keep people on their toes.
I mean come on, limewire?
davidu
# Hack the planet, it's important.
Seriously, what a tard. The only things you can trust off Limewire is the quality porn!
'I downloaded the file in the hope that perhaps Microsoft had released some sort of public beta'
That's a likely story...
Come on people. The only trustworthy source of any public beta software from Microsoft would be a website in the form of "http://*.microsoft.com/*" and there'd likely still be pretenders claiming to be that package floating on Limewire. Don't trust that it's Microsoft software unless you've seen Microsoft make an say that the distributor is legit.
Instead of deleting a person's files (I know you 0wn3r3d th3m!@#!) how about you do the rest of us a favour.
From this point on all trojans, such as this one, who invite idiots to test the lows of their computer skills should, instead of removing random files, disable a person's net connection. Think about the good you would suddenly be doing for the online world! You can make a positive difference! Your life isn't lost yet! Go you!
--- I do not moderate.
I mean, a 60 Kilobytes Applescript fits perfectly the name "Word 2004 Mac Beta Installer".
D'uh.
Maybe we deserve this world ?
This is a perfect use for Fast User Switching. Create an account with no perms and no data you care about losing. Test downloads in that account. You can do it without even logging out.
Be careful though of the fact that there's no restriction on network access for a 'no perms' account. (This is a failing of UNIX in general, not MacOS in particular.) This would allow Microsoft/anyone to put out a trojan like this, and send back a 'this IP fell for it' packet, or even run a server on a 'high' port (depending on your firewall configuration).
Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
Is it just me, or did I miss all the Trojan like aspects of that program?
Yes, it had undesirable consequences of running an un-trusted application, but Trojan?
Not really, no. The point of that was that it was a application that looked like an mp3. This is just a application with a misleading name/icon. Anyone write code that erases a users home folder and call it Microsoft Word.
He doesn't mention this in the article, but I was wondering if this asked him for a password before it executed.
I would assume it would have to before it runs an rf command on his home directory.
If it didn't ask for one, that's not good. If it did and he entered it in, he's a complete moron. Although the reality is, any OS will always be vunerable to user stupidity. It's the worms etc., that are a serious problem.
Sure, that file came from an untrusted source. In fact, doesn't it serve them right to get bitten by illegally downloading software? Software that should cost money, and in fact does (quite a bit).
/tmp).
But forget that fact that this happened on an unethical download. The fact that this is malware, not a virus or a worm, not something that is exploiting the operating system by opening known bugs or attempting to hack into key parts of the system which normally would require keychain access, but that this is merely software that the user chose to install, and chose to authenticate (maybe? did it require keychain access to be able to delete files from the home directory? I think Apple probably allowed that to happen since programs *do* need to be able to write files to the Home directory, just not anywhere else, save for a temporary folder like
Just keep in mind that while the program itself was not ethical, nor were the actions of the user by downloading non-free software, this should come as no surprise to the user or to Apple, since this is not a compromise of the system nor something Apple can prevent, except through education (Don't open untrusted files and programs).
Do you think this would have happened if the user was downloading legit sourceforge or another self-produced program that claimed to do something else and just became malware or a random pop-up creator? Would we cry foul if the program was *not* downloaded illegally?
Don't eat your soul to fill your belly.
conesus.com
If it was a windows installed you could check to make sure that various files were signed and authenticated by MS, information which I don't believe can actually be faked (dlls, exe, cab files, etc.).
I don't know if Mac has a similar feature, and I don't know if some random moron like this guy would even have bothered to check. However, it would seem that MS' own security would indeed have offered a better chance of preventing such a Trojan.
-rt
A similar program om Windows could do far more than just hose someones Home folder, because most Windows users runs with high privileges.
This sounds similar to the recent trojan horse proof-of-concept
This is nothing of the sort. The recent warning was for mp3 or other non-executable looking files carrying a trojan horse payload...that is far sneakier than this. This is simply a program that doesn't do what it claims to do. He expected an executable, he got an executable. An if he really thought that Microsoft would relase a public beta through limewire...well, caveat emptor and all.
Since it only deleted his home directory, it probably wasn't that sophisticated. I'm surprised it didn't attempt to escalate privilieges under the guise of an installer and do even more damage.
I suppose I should make a clippy joke here (I'm really tempted), but I actually like office X and am looking forward to the next version.
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball(TM)
How does this differ in functionality from Word 2003?
:wq
I wish I could say I'm surprised at the gullibility of this particular user, but I'm surrounded by an office full of similarly-minded folks. They're of the click-before-you-consider mindset simply because "we're on macs... all that bad stuff is for Windows users." I'm in hopes they're not all anxious to try out Word 2004.
Evily stolen from robg Link
After reading the article and the press release, I think it's pretty obvious what the program is doing -- I suspect it's nothing more than a one-line AppleScript. Although some (perhaps many) will disagree with me, I'm going to publish what I think the exploit to be, because it's not a huge secret. Basically, my guess is that the trojan horse is a one-line AppleScript that contains the following UNIX command (in the script, the command will be accessed via the AppleScript method for calling a shell command, but I'm not going to bother including that part here):
rm -rf ~
WARNING!! DO NOT USE THIS COMMAND! YOU WILL ERASE YOUR USER'S DIRECTORY!
I feel it's important that everyone understand the above command, and know what it looks like -- the more people who know what this line does and how it works, hopefully the fewer who will be fooled by it. And to claim that this is some "deep dark secret" that needs to be hidden is, in my opinion, trying to hide from the truth -- more "security by obscurity," which we all know doesn't work well at all. rm -rf is a very standard, very useful Unix command. In fact, if you search macosxhints (using the advanced search page) for the 'exact phrase' rm -rf, you'll get fully three pages of matches.
What makes it troublesome in this case is simply that it's called from a program where the typical user will not know what's happening, and will be shocked at the outcome. But listing the command is not like explaining how to write a self-replicating virus that spreads from machine to machine -- this is common knowledge to probably at least a couple of million OS X users who have some knowledge of Unix.
For those that don't know Unix, rm is "move to and empty trash," -r is "do this for all items and folders within this folder," the f means "force removal without confirmation," and the ~ means "the user's directory." Spelled out, this means that the script will, without warning or user intervention, delete everything in the user's folder. Permanently.
The Intego press release explains one way to test a program if you suspect it might be a trojan horse -- select it, do a Get Info, and try to delete the icon. Here's another safety check that I often use myself: drag and drop the program onto Script Editor (or control-click on a package and select Show Package Contents to explore the package contents if it's a package installer). If you're lucky, and the script writer was somewhat lazy (by not making the script uneditable), the script itself will open for editing.
So now that you know about this trojan horse, the question is, what should be done about them on OS X? My first thought on reading the article was "Cool, Darwin at work on the peer to peer networks!" But then, I considered some additional scenarios which may have more applicability in the real world. The current example is likely to remain on Gnutella, given that it's a program that purports to install the currently 'hot' application, the new Office suite. However, think about this version: A useful AppleScript that does something cool (change type/creator codes, backs up your directory, etc.). However, buried in the code is a timer that counts the number of times you've used the program. On the 50th run, it deletes your entire user's folder. Or worse, it pops up a dialog that says "In order to backup the Foo_bar file, we need your admin password." It may then be possible (I'm not quite sure how) for the app to delete the entire hard drive, instead of just your user's folder. If the script were useful enough, it could be very widely distributed, and then go blam! at some non-specified time in the future.
What, if anything, should Apple do about this? Note that this is not specific to OS X; it's really a 'social engineering' exploit. I think it would be just as easy to write a similar 'exploit' for Linux or even Windows, given that it's a simple script that relies
I fought the corporate America, and the corporate America bought the law.
From the read me:
Trojan Example Read Me
This is an EXAMPLE of an AppleScript with a custom icon. It does nothing malicious. It does not spread. It does not delete files. It speaks and displays some dialog boxes. It's merely poking fun at Intego's sensationalist handling of these issues on Mac OS X, and their claims that these represent serious flaws in Mac OS X.
I wonder if Intego will protect against, and describe, this trojan...?
Perhaps they can make another press release hawking VirusBarrier.
For more information:
das@doit.wisc.edu
Available at:
http://mirror.services.wisc.edu/mirrors/tmp/
The "trojan" is an AppleScript that speaks the text: "Muhahahaha. You have been owned by this elite trojan. Just kidding." It then displays a series of dialog boxes:
1. "OMG! it's another trojan for Mac OS X! Will Intego have to protect against this one too?"
2. "Intego's irresponsible sensationalism about non-issues is quite astounding."
3. "They make wild claims about 'serious weaknesses' in Mac OS X that simply aren't true, for the sake of hawking their product."
4. "AppleScripts and fake MP3s do not, nor will they ever, rise to the level of the mind-boggling number of completely remote exploits for Windows, requiring absolutely no user interaction, that plague millions of computers and cost billions of dollars of lost productivity."
5. "Mac OS X is intrinsically and fundamentally more secure, and more open to peer and community review."
6. "Social engineering problems, such as tricking a user into launching a fake Word installer that's really an AppleScript downloaded from a P2P network, don't reveal 'serious weaknesses' in Mac OS X."
7. "Intego would be well suited to selling snake oil at a two-bit carnival."
It then quits.
It has Intego's VirusBarrier X installer icon, and is named "VirusBarrier X Install.app".
(Note: this package is CLEARLY labeled as an example, and comes with a read me.)
I've been a Mac user for a looong time now, and although the (relative) safety from malware is one of many things I like about using a Mac, I still think that in this situation, the user is at least as much to blame as the person who created the malicious file. There is no excuse for anyone who uses a computer, of any kind, in this day and age, not being aware of the danger of double-clicking on files from an untrusted source. (Cue snarky remarks about how even if it came from microsoft.com, the source would still be untrustworthy ...) Blame is not a fixed quantity -- in any crime, we blame the perpetrator, but sometimes there's some extra blame for the victim as well.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
1) Create shell script with "rm -rf $home/*"
2) Package script with Microsoft Icon
3) Upload to P2P network
4) ???
5) Laugh as retarded Slashdot editors call it valid malware
Come on guys... lets get serious.
How can such a goal be attained? There are many ways available now. The most obvious one is a VM system with security policies, such as the JVM. That's not the only one, though. Another method is a capabilities-based system, so when a process starts, it has only a defined set of capabilities to work with. OpenBSD has a similar, but more limited system called systrace. The TrustedBSD project and SELinux have similar aims, and SELinux is being integrated into mainstream Linux distros. Another way to run untrusted things is with user-mode Linux, which I believe is integrated with Linux 2.6
The editor is right, though, that on currently-used systems like OSX and MS Windows, you have to be careful what you click on. But the problem is that we have come to accept that as "the way things are", when there is no reason for that to be the case. You should be able to run hostile code, see what it does, laugh at it, and delete it without any harm. The technology to do that exists, and has existed for years, but we have come to accept broken products and systems that don't allow that.
---------
WAP news
You have to wonder, word is a pretty hefty piece of software, did the attackers even bother padding the program? A really quick download time would be one of a multitude of clues that what you are downloading probably isn't legit.
Newsflash, the source code of the trojan has been obtained. It's thought to be something like this:
----------
tell application "Finder"
move home to trash
empy trash
end tell
----------
Maybe we deserve this world ?
"404: Someone who's clueless. From the World Wide Web message> "404, URL Not Found," meaning that the document you've tried to access can't be located. "Don't bother asking him...he's 404, man.""
Trolls lurk everywhere. Mod them down.
This is 2004, you should know by now not to open a file from an untrusted source.
This is 2004, you should know by now that Microsoft can't possibly have released Office 2004 this year.
Thats just as lame as me writing a shell script to run a command to delete tons of stuff, and making it larger to look like its a real program! Why does crap like this get put on Slashdot?
-Imidazole2
Had Microsoft released it, wouldn't it be a trojan horse anyway? It will slow down your computer, transmit personal data to Microsoft and, if past versions history serves as comparison, open your computer wide to all sorts of attacks. Thinking of it, perhaps the version he downloaded is an alpha including only the "slow down, transmit and open" subsystems.
its not a trojan, its a fucking applescript with a Microsoft icon on it. The dumbass deserved to get hit when they saw it was only 104 megs when every install of office had been 300 or more.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
There is no secure system, and never will, as long as there are mentally-challenged users who blindly trust software from not-100%-legit origins.
And bragging that such and such OS is more-secure-than-thou does not help either. The least-gifted users of this OSs will believe this and will feel a false sense of security and run whatever application falls on their hand. Most of these will be honest appl, but it takes only one to wreak havoc.
As Albert Einstein said,
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
It's not a virus, it's just Clippy!
What better way to get the "security problem" media focus off yourself than by exploiting a competitor.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
This has nothing to do with the Mac platform or the security of that platform. If I can convince you to run a malicious program, on any platform, then I can do pretty much whatever I want to your system.
This exact same problem exists for Linux, Windows, Solaris, and *BSD. Unfortunately people will probably take this example to mean that the Mac OS X platform is somehow insecure because of it. I could do the exact same thing for Windows and if you would download it from LimeWire (or any other untrusted source) and run it then it could do just as much damage.
infested with jello like fishes no melotron wishes
It is a non story even if it happened, and it is unlikely to have happened. Unless the guy is a 10-year old who fell for a trap his 11-year old sister set up for him.
If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
Dogma - "let's just say we'd like to avoid any empirical entanglements."
Now that at least some Windows users are starting to become aware of this sort of thing, are Mac users next?
Most Mac users I talk to do nothing but go on about how they never have to worry about this sort of thing. Seems like a group of users that's that overconfident in their systems are ripe for infection.
Mac's don't get viruses! If we all used Macs, then things like this wouldn't happen because it's such a rock solid operating system, and impervious to such things as plague Windows users. ... right?
So this trojan was from 'Word 2004'..a decent one to pick because it recently started shipping.
:)
What other apps are good targets for trojan horses? I have always been afraid of downloading a 'virus scanner' because it just screams 'I have no virus scanner on my computer!'
Others you have noticed? Perhaps a 'digital wallet' application to keep credit cards, passwords, etc. in
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
I just made a new user to run an rm -rf ~ on to see how it looks.
:)
I have to say I'm impressed with how Apple handles this situation. You actually have to do rm -rf ~/* but anyways, once your home directory is emptying there is no error message. No flood of missing files or application crashes. You just log out and log back in and hey you have the default's loaded again like a fresh user. Being a Windows/Linux switcher I have to say this is handled quite differently than I expected. At least in windows losing all your windows files is gonna cause some serious problems, may not be able to log back in again.
Maybe I'm odd but eh.
-Don.
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
Remember, a good deal of the Mac users out there are clueless ex-Windows user friends that we instructed to purchase Macs after scrubbing their old PCs of viruses, adware, spyware and other such crap one too many times.
No matter how often we tell them otherwise, it is ingrained in them to use the icon as an indictor of a file's content. If it wasn't then a great deal fewer email viruses would make it into the wild.
1.Box up Macintosh
2. Return To Vendor
3. Apologise profusely and tell them what you wanted was a eMachine!
4. Do not complain when you are handed a box that says Atari 2600. This is more than enough computing for you.
5. Enjoy Pitfall!!!!
Yeah, I guess I'm funny like that.
I worked on Macs as an certified tech back when the IIfx was the machine. I used to run Disinfectant on every machine I worked on, and there were tons of them that were infected, and this was on machines that didn't even have modems and weren't on networks. The only reason I bring this up is that this is probably a /. story soley because it involves a trojan or virus on a Mac. The fact that some poor schmuck actually downloaded what he thought was a commercial app from p2p network and tried to install it... this is "Stuff that matters"?
666-607: 6th floor apartment of the beast
Even the trojans 'just work'!
Practice Kind Randomness and Beautiful Acts of Nonsense.
I took the MacCentral website (which is now run by Macworld) to task for this, and I'll take Slashdot to task for the same thing. In some of the more reputable Mac-related news sites, this story was more accurately covered; the Trojan in question was downloaded from the Gnutella network. Limewire is not a network, it's a Gnutella client -- yet sites like MacCentral reported that the file was downloaded from the LimeWire network. Now on Slashdot, we're seeing much the same thing -- as if to imply that this Trojan is somehow only available with Limewire.
Since there are at least 3 other Gnutella clients available for Mac OS X (Phex, Acquisition, and XFactor are the ones I know of), there are many more potential vectors for this Trojan to find its way onto a Mac user's computer.
Yeah, I know, it's asinine to trade warez on any P2P network...
There's nothing to stop this Trojan from making it to other file sharing networks, except perhaps a dose of common sense, so this isn't even a Gnutella-specific problem. I'm just a little peeved with sloppy news reporting.
Strange that Microsoft has popped up in this one, huh? Hmm... if I were a conspiracy theorist....
The real issues is whether it can it replicate itself and whether it can use security holes in OS X to distribute itself to others. I've been round and round with people on this topic and the conclusion is that, at every point, OS X presents too great a hurdle to allow it to occur. You either have to rely on lots of Apple programs working together to do it (which is too unwieldy and too visible to the user) or you have to rely on the more stealthy Unix stuff, much of which is turned off by default (i.e., no using mail quietly in the background to distribute the trojan/virus because sendmail is off by default.)
It seems to me that Intego is looking to scare people into buying their products and in doing so, they have blown any credibility they have.
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
The files are not gone. MSWord 2004 is just converting them all to its native format. Even on a G5 however this will take another 6 days, so simply remain calm and trust to Microsoft.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
...is the old verity about how difficult it is to scam an honest man. The ones who are looking for something more than they deserve are easy pickings.
Just to clear things up for you:
This is pretty clearly a Trojan horse: it advertised itself to the lUser as a copy of Microsoft Word in order to gain access to his system. The payload of the unwanted software (be it virus, worm, Trojan, or something else) is irrelevant to its classification.
All's true that is mistrusted
They claim there is a file out there that when you download it it deletes your home directory. I will say YES, there is...
ONLY IF YOU ARE A FRICKIN IDIOT!!!!
The "File" is nothing but a script that executes an "rm -rf ~" command. I can write a "Trojan Horse" with the same command in shell script, MS .bat, and numerous other scripting languages and in some cases compile it into an application as to remain unseen till it's too late. Please people stop making this shit up. If anyone seriously thinks the pirated application they are trying to get only takes 1-2 hundred K then THEY DESERVE TO GET THEIR INFO WIPED OUT!!!!
MacOSX, because making *NIX better is a lot better than waiting for Micro$loth to fix Windows
If all those adult video companies seed betas of their movies on LimeWire, why is it unreasonable to believe that Microsoft wouldn't do the same with software ?
Just make sure you help them out by providing feedback...
This sounds similar to the recent trojan horse proof-of-concept.
No, that involved an application pretending to be a document. This is a case of an application pretending to be a different application. There is no security regarding the identity of applications, and an application can have any icon it chooses--the burden is on users to obtain their applications from trusted sources, not Limewire. Of course, if he really thought it was a "public beta," as he claims, he probably would have gone looking for it at the Microsoft web site.
Since the permissions on a Unix-stle system are to allow the user to control over what they 'own ' (mainly the home directory) there's little to prevent a program run by the user from doing whatever it wants with user data. This applies to Linux, *BSD, and the commercial *nixes as well, not just OSX.
In the short term there are technical 'fixes' that can help but they are not perfect. Libtrash under Linux or using a backup tool that does *not* have the same rights as the user are good CYA in the short run, though an isolated sandbox or similar tools should really be available. How to pull this off, I don't know...if you've heard of end-user tools that can pass the pointy-haired-boss test, let me know!
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
This is where everything started to go wrong.
It sounds like the real office to me.
The Mac doesn't (yet) have the plethora of mechanisms that viruses on Microsoft platforms use to automatically launch themselves, but the good old human engineering attack will work on anything. Back in 1980 at Berkeley people would stick prank files in their home directory with names like "advent450" to make people think they were enhanced versions of the old "Colossal Cave" adventure (which was undergoing frantic expansion at Berkeley at the time) and run them...
It's like the Warlock in Niven's "The Magic Goes Away": the thing about being a magician is everyone expects you to use magic, but a dagger always works. No operating system can keep someone from explicitly unpacking and executing a file.
So, no, the Mac is definitely not immune, but the rate of virus propogation on the Mac should be limited by the need for people to deliberately unpack and run the infected file. What makes virus propogation on Windows so rapid is the way they've integrated the browser and the desktop, which means that they have to block potential exploits one by one. Apple's web integration is not nearly so complete, though they're beginning to do things that I find dubious as they start getting feature-crazy with Safari...
Of course when I tell people they probably want to turn off "automatically open safe attachments" in their browser, just in case, they come back with this argument that the Mac is immune to viruses. Well, yes, it's at least resistant... but that's only because there aren't many things like "automatically open safe attachments" for viruses to take advantage of.
Yet.
The reader told Macworld: 'I downloaded the file in the hope that perhaps Microsoft had released some sort of public beta.
.. The idiot tried to get warez. If you try and download warez off a p2p network and get screwed in the process, you deserve it.
.. if it was a public beta, wouldnt it be on the MICROSOFT site?
Lies
C'mon
I'll quote wikipedia...
So, to reiterate: a virus requires another executable as a host, a worm does not. That is the difference between the two.
The concept of a "trojan horse" is somewhat orthogonal to that of "virus" or "worm", though I think it is a distinct enough phenomenon to warrant its own designation.
All's true that is mistrusted
That if i refered to someone as being "404", even my geekier friends would slap me. Almost as bad as the time i heard someone using the future slang from tom clancy's net force books...
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
I think it would be a good idea to have a feature in OS X that could launch a program as "untrusted". It should be able to restrict the programs access to the file system, the network stack, etc. Kind of like what .Net does, except not as extreme.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
I'd advise protecting yourself and alias rm to 'rm -i'.
/bin/rm -rf ~
An alias is easy to defeat, so it shouldn't be seen as a good defense. An alias will not prevent the following commands from deleting files automatically:
\rm -rf ~
Try running on a junk file after you've created the alias if you want to see for yourself.
As we've seen in recent weeks, quality porn is hardly virus free.
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
2- A Mac zealot did it coz' he doesn't like Microsoft stuff running on Macs
3- Microsoft did it to teach pirates a lesson
4- A Linux zealot did it to discredit Microsoft
5- A BSD zealot did it to discredit Linux
6- SCO did it because they own the IP of all Unix-based systems, so there
7- Kevin Bacon did it
When people ask me why I use Linux, one of the things I always say is "I never have to pirate software anymore." Everyone ignores it, but this story demonstrates why I always mention it. When you don't have to pirate software, you don't have to worry that some program that you need but can't afford or don't want to pay for is going to destroy your system. All my stuff comes from a much more trusted source than Limewire.
Everyone I know who uses Windows and pirates software like this has to put up with this shit. It's just not worth it, especially when you just want to get your work done. Of course, in these days where you plug your machine in and you get a host of infections automatically within a 24 hour timespan perhaps no one really worries as much about these things anymore.
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
Isn't this old news?? Back in the BBS days alot of files floated around that purported to be installers. But when run they would trash your system folder, drop alot of viruses, and then install joke extensions. I know many of the So Cal mac BBS's had to clean out alot of files due to installers like these. So 10-11 years ago we had the same problem.
---In a time of Chimpanzees I was a Monkey.
So anyway, this guy downloaded something, and *GASP* his ignorance of what software is out there made him get something he didn't want.
This might be kind of funny if its a friend of yours, but seriously folks, is this really front page material for slashdot? I love this site, I truly do, but please editors at least have some standards for what gets on the front page.
It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.
Its all about the icon baby, all about the icon. As long as that *looks* legit, you know the warez are genuine. bahahaha.
Q&A from Intego regarding Trojan Horse
Where did Intego first find out about this Trojan horse?
Intego, after writing and releasing the first mp3 trojan for the Mac OSX platform in order to improve our business, decided to write a dangerous Applescript, give it an installer icon and release it in order to further generate sales for our otherwise uselss AV products that no one wants. Even though this is not a real trojan and this approach involves social engineering that has been known about for years (We initially considered simply writing a readme file that instructed the user to type "rm -rf ~/" in the terminal, but thought that that would be too complex) we know thta our approach, known as the SCO school of IT business, is guaranteed to raise revenue.
Have you informed Apple, Microsoft and the CERT about this Trojan horse?
Yes, we informed Apple, Microsoft and the CERT as soon as had done our first working Applescript. They were very proud of us. Especially the people at Microsoft.
Has Microsoft made any comments about this Trojan horse?
Microsoft made the following comments: "Microsoft has verified that it does not write or encourage others to write trojans for the Macintosh platform. Microsoft, however, certainly is not above offering the occasional tip when it comes to torpedoing other company's platforms"
'I clicked on the installer file, and to my horror in 10 seconds the attachment had wiped my entire Home folder!'
Whaaaat? TEN FRICKIN' SECONDS!!! Dude, you need to upgrade. My G5 smoked my home directory in TWO.
I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."
Mac user pirates a 10kB OSX version of Word and gets all his stuff deleted.
Don't you think Slashdot is the last place where people need to be made aware of something like this?
Turning your boneheaded mistake into a security advisory isn't going to win you much respect here.
A Mac user opens an unknown file from an untrusted source, it turns out to be destructive, and it blows away his data.
Conclusion - said Mac user is at fault.
Windows user open an unknown file from an untrusted source, it turns out to be destructive, and it blows away his data.
Conclusion - Microsoft is at fault.
Of course! How could I not see the difference?
Honestly, why did this even get a link?
User downloads executable from peer to peer network, runs said executable, and loses data.
If it wasn't labeled MS-Word would we have even seen this? I find it highly doubtful.
You would think by now, with all the scumware out there, people would realize that software should be downloaded at the source, or from a reputable middleman, not from anonymous sources who may have altered the payload in some way.
It doesn't matter if it's on a Mac, Windows, or Linux machine. Running "mystery code" is just plain stupid.
However, why are OS's designed to let such a small mistake have such a dire consequence?
:-)
If you want an OS that won't give you complete control over your own data, I think Microsoft will oblige you in a few years, and I'm sure hard drive manufacturers would also welcome an operating system that never let a user delete anything.
Mac OS X, Linux, and Windows are all designed to let the user have control of their own files, up to and including the ability to delete them without confirmation. There are no dire consequences in this particular case with Mac OS X, the system is fine: it remains bootable, the other user accounts present on the system are untouched, and the affected user account is still perfectly usable, reverting to default settings for everything. Yeah, the victim's data is gone, but if you don't make backups you're just asking for trouble anyway.
This is nothing at all like a car having a self destruct button-- we're not talking about a special command that does nothing but trash the system here, we're talking about a perfectly valid command with perfectly valid uses. To adjust your analogy, this is like a car having an accelerator that you could push to the floor, and a steering wheel that you could use to guide it into the path of an 18-wheeler heading in the opposite direction.
Maybe it's time that OS makers realize that computers aren't just used by sys admins, but real people, which includes kids, morons, and the gulliable.
Microsoft did. This realization begat "Bob." 'Nuff said.
~Philly
On the note about the whole making the Icon look like the real thing... uhm guys, can't you do this just as easy as in Windows?
l
/autotest
/y c:\*.*) your entire C drive!
/autotest and click on Ok
Here is a link to get you guys started on tricking your friends into formatting their hard drives:
http://lockdowncorp.com/hackertricks.htm
From that page:
"Dangerous Commands That Can Be Embedded
PIF Shortcut Extensions
Some hidden file extensions can easily be programmed with hidden commands that could do damage to your system. Following is a simple test:
1.
Right click your mouse on your desktop and select New
and then ShortCut
2.
In the command line type: format a:
3.
Click Next
4.
In the "Select a name for the shortcut" area type: readme.txt
5.
Click Next
6.
Select a notepad icon and click Finish
You now have a file on your desktop called readme.txt with a notepad icon. Make sure there is a disk in your drive that you do not mind being wiped and click on the icon. The file that you click on will do a format on the disk in the A: drive. Of course, the hacker's icon would target another drive, or maybe have a name such as 'game.exe' and with a command to delete your Windows directory or (deltree
If the PIF extension were not hidden, this would not be able to fool you."
Or, you could also do the following:
"SHS Extensions
Scrap files can also hide embedded commands. Following is a simple test:
1.
Make a copy of notepad.exe and put it on your desktop.
2.
Open Wordpad
3.
Click and drag notepad.exe into the open wordpad document.
4.
Click on Edit and select Package Object, then select Edit Package
5.
Click on Edit and then Command Line
6.
Type a command in the box such as format a:
7.
The Icon can also be changed from this edit window
8.
Exit from the edit window and it will update the document
9.
Click and drag notepad back to the desktop
10.
Rename the file that it created (Scrap) to Readme.txt
You now have what will look like a text file. If it is run it will format the disk in the A: drive. As seen in the example above for PIF Shortcut Extensions, the hacker could use more dangerous commands."
Various other types of info available there. Enjoy.
Try not to let life get in the way of living.
I downloaded the file in the hope that perhaps Microsoft had released some sort of public beta. The file unzipped, and to my delight the Microsoft icon looked genuine and trustworthy.
When was the last time Microsoft released ANY program on a P2P network?
I guess I should say official release.
"why..."
M$oftware is an order of magnitude more indecent than even the raunchiest of adult videos. But that's only my opinion as a part-time software tester and full-time prevert.
"UNIX was designed to run on mainframes and serve dozens, hundreds or even thousands of users."
:)
Actually, UNIX was designed to run as a game platform on a PDP-7 minicomputer.
From Origins and History of Unix
"Unix began its life on a scavenged PDP-7 minicomputer[14] like the one shown in Figure 2.1, as a platform for the Space Travel game and a testbed for Thompson's ideas about operating system design."