Slashdot Mirror
Analysis of Spyware
scubacuda writes "What actually happens when you install adware/spyware/malware? Follow the Bouncing Malware examines what's downloaded, redirected, and obfuscated. A fascinating read. (Part two was postponed in order to cover a new My Doom variant.)"
I have been an IE devotee since v4.x came out. I have recently moved over to Firefox in order to stop me having to keep up with all the security problems I started to experience only inthe last couple of months.
Seriously, how hard can it be for MS to write an application as straightforward, yet secure as Firefox.
I downloaded Service pack 2 release candidate and noted a lot of security improvements and features, but in agreeance with with MS whom today released the full Service pack 2, it seems to mainly add 'bars and locks' to your 'doors and windows'. Whereas Firefox seems to be a better neighborhood to live in from the start.
Well, you could feed the spyware's controllers some fudged data, but how do you think you're going to get a SETI@Home-like model to "generate the data needed to put these goofs in jail"? Please, explain how repeated computation of fast Fourier transforms will do anything to uncover the spyware's owner. :)
Suppose we managed to get your nice antispyware software to collect data on the spyware's owners. What form do you think that data will take? I'm guessing it would be little more than IP addresses. Perhaps you can convince the authorities to subpeona the ISP for the owners of those addresses, but I doubt it. Good luck.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
I've found that all the spyware can be kept down to basically zero if you do what I do (even for Windows users). I use Firefox and not IE (it's interesting to look at how many hits ad-aware gets for tracking cookies etc. with IE)... And speaking of ad-aware, I run it regularly. Honestly, spyware statistics would go way way down if people ran an anti-spyware program now and then. I find in my experience, when you run it for the first time and get 500 - 1500 "objects" found, it wakes the user up as to what sort of crap is on there, and after that they seem to be pretty good about running it themselves.
Join the Empire! http://www.empirereborn.net/
Wouldn't it be great to see spyware producers suffer legal consequences? Don't think it will happen, though: the political and legal system is too busy protecting the recording and movie industries at the moment.
You're missing a key point. Spyware operators can't be put in jail because they're not breaking any laws simply by publishing spyware. Being scum is not a crime.
A virus gets onto a user's computer through security holes, but malware simply walks through the front door stating their evil intents in a clickwrap TOS that the user usually doesn't read. There's no crime in getting people to agree to something stupid in exchange for a silly little app that runs in the corner of their screen.
Look, I have worked on systems that have had hundreds of infections, from viruses and spyware. I routinely subject a drive from a machine with spyware to the same checks and controls I do with viruses. I start by removing the victim drive and putting it in a secondary control system. Only then can I properly remove the hooks installed to prevent you from really removing things.
I've seen everything from DLL hooks to putting itself into the system restore file or hidden OEM restore partitions. This way windows itself will *fix* your removal. I've seen where they try to emulate legitimate hotpacks and patches. It's pretty simple really, if a program installs surreptitiously, disguises itself, and takes steps to prevent it's removal - than it is a virus.
The state AGs are too busy taking campaign money from the copyright cartel and sending threating letters to "P2P companies" to worry about spyware.
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
Your implying that spy and malware exist because people want attention. That may be true concerning many viruses, but spy ware is simply about money.
I do not disagree, and let me reinforce the point. the 'wares take a direct path to customers systems from known sources, unlike virii.
If someone goofs and winds up on a site like the article mentioned, guess what, the customer just hit a malware mine.
It's not like the lovebug bit where it spread like wildfire, at random, the 'wares are more focused and actually show a purpose behind their creation: to retrieve personal information on the user behind the keyboard.
Under Federal and State regulations, this shows Willing Intent to Commit Malice, possible violations of Wiretapping Laws,and is grounds for prosecution to the fullest extent of the Law.
First rule of holes; When in one, stop digging.
What's your ticker symbol, because I don't ever want to buy stock in a company that can't run a network properly.
Any system where someone properly configures it and keeps an eye on it is ahead of the game, regardless of the operating system.
Hmmm. Interesting opening comment:
Surely you don't mean to discredit these malcontents' freewill do you? And the suggestion that the have "need" to hurt other people also seems to disown them of their personal responsibility to behave properly dispite if they are malcontent and have antisocial personality "features". I'd rather call the later "choices."Shheesh! What kind system would any lawful country have if they were to punish their criminals because someone else, i.e. "society," made them choose to be evil, malicious, self-serving, or greedy? Sure, society and it's micro-cosmos might promote these things, but everyone is ultimately responsible for their own decisions. Please, let us not even hint at the contrary.
Thanks,
William
We need an open source project to provide this functionality in a spyware-free format. The reality is that people need dancing girls, they need strippers on their desktop, they need other bells and wistles. And they will install them, so I'd rather see them install GNUGirl and GNUBuddy.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.