Slashdot Mirror
Virus Writers Look Ahead: Target 64-bit Windows
Ashcrow writes "A new virus, named W64.Shruggle.1318 by Symantec, is being 'tested' on AMD64 machines running 64-bit Windows. While it is not currently a danger to 64-bit Windows users, it does show that virus writers are looking toward the future. The exploitable software in questions is currently unreleased outside of beta. News.com has the full article."
I hadn't realised that there were sufficiently many fundamental changes to a 64-bit system as compared to a 32-bit system that meant that a virus written for one wouldn't work on the other. What's so different? How does a different integer or word size affect the functioning of a virus so greatly, when interoperability is such a priority?
"almost"?
I have seen several virus warnings in computer mags that go "This virus has currenly not been spotted outside of $ANTIVIRUSCOMPANY's labs".
Well, how did it get in there, if not from the outside? It was made in there.
Actually, this doesn't really make a lot of sense. If the entire point of a virus is to cause widespread destruction, then doesn't it make more sense to write a virus for 32bit computers?
Although I thoroughly disagree with these malicious programs, and any virus of any discription, they do encourage people to create neater code and to develop better code that is invulnerable to these kinds of exploits. One could always hypothesise about how much we may or may not have developed programming code without having to spend money on prevention of these exploits.
If at first you DON'T succeed, Skydiving is NOT for YOU!!
Unless it somehow infected their computers or their systems were targeted maybe??? I know of a few virus authors who turned from black-hat to white-hat instead of spend time in jail, that isn't a bad thing. Where will you find the really great, if misguided geniuses? John Carmack wanted to be a phreak in the early bbs days.
Tinfoil hat time: perhaps all the FUD about SP2 problems, users unwilling to update etc. is just being put out by spammers and malware merchants.
I agree there is a problem, especially with people who think they are creative. I'm afraid I was positively delighted when the author Louis de Bernieres lost the first 60 pages of his new novel becaue he had failed to make a backup, and complained that he didn't expect to have to make backups, he wasn't a computer expert (or words to that effect). People need to understand that failure to learn the basics can result in pain and distress.
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
...anti-virus company profits are down.
Hardware stack protection, finally, after all these years! All praise AMD! ;]
Some years ago I contracted with Symantec for about five months and worked closely with several of their departments, including the folks who did tech support for their anti-virus software. During that time Symantec offered a cash bounty to any techie who brought in a virus 'from the wild' that wasn't covered by the their antivirus software.
It was common knowledge that many of these 'wild' viruses were actually, in fact, written by the support staff themselves in order to collect on the bounty. But Symantec didn't care because this just allowed them to enlarge their virus definition file and show their customers why it was important to subscribe to their update service. From my point of view it was a "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" sort of thing.
This was one of just many things about Symantec which disgusted me so much that after that contract I refused to work with them ever again. I don't know if they still have an update service for their anti-virus software, but it wouldn't surprise me if many of our future 64-bit viruses came directly from employees of Symantec itself.
It's a great business model: release the viruses, then sell the software that combats those viruses. Unethical and illegal, but a solid money-maker for those who don't care about such trivial things.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
The problem with windows isn't that its users are stupid and don't know shit. The problem is that MS has chosen to encourage these computer morons to feel like they know what they are doing and has given them enough rope to hang themselves with.
It makes people feel good and gives helpdesk monkeys around the world fulltime employment.
Remember, virusses, trojans, spyware ARE GOOD for the local economy.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
User base is not as significant as people would think. The main reasons for attacks against an OS are reputation and design.
Throughout the years, Microsoft has been very lax and carefree about security. Since the 90's, security experts have warned Microsoft about security issues and Microsoft blatantly ignored them. As a result of this negligence, Microsoft had earned a bad reputation.
Then you get into design and you see unnecessary services running, browser integration, ActiveX/COM with unrestricted access to the system, services listening to anything that speaks including WAN traffic, NetBIOS going over TCP/IP over a WAN by default, file and printer sharing binding to all adapters including those that haven't been selected, Microsoft insisting that personal firewalls are the answer to unnecessary Windows services, etc. The list goes on and on.
Had Microsoft been more serious about security in the 90's, it would have been a whole different story.
How are you going to completely eradicate all current rapist and prevent any new ones from popping up in the future?
No, you can't. So I'm not going to call you flamebait. I'm going to call you a retard since it seems much more appropriate .