Slashdot Mirror


New Worm Installs Sniffer

fmorgan writes "Netcraft just posted a note saying that a new worm installs a network sniffer in the infected computers." When I read these things it kind of makes me wonder why it took this long. Update: 09/13 22:47 GMT by T : More innovation: Ant writes "The Register has a story about a piece of malware that 'talks' to victims. The Amus email worm uses Windows Speech Engine (which is built-in to Windows XP) to deliver a curious message to infected users. The message reads: "How are you. I am back. My name is mister hamsi. I am seeing you. Haaaaaaaa. You must come to turkiye. I am cleaning your computer. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. 0. Gule. Gule." ("Gule. Gule" is Turkish for "Bye. Bye". "Hamsi" is a small fish, like an anchovy, found in the Black Sea). F-Secure has a copy of the sound file generated by the message."

135 of 491 comments (clear)

  1. If only the worm installed a Swiffer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Then dust free computers for all!

    1. Re:If only the worm installed a Swiffer by davidsyes · · Score: 2, Funny

      Is it "Amus" e-mail or "Anus" e-mail worm. Give a whole new flexible dimension to being rooted, cracked, backdoored, sniffed, packeted...

      Back orifice is trying hard to live up to it's namesake, or is windoze trying hard to reciprocate (that *9 number) with back orifice?

      David Syes

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  2. More technical details by Lord+Grey · · Score: 5, Informative
    Here is propagation information on the worm WORM_SDBOT.UH from Trend Micro (link pulled from the article):

    Network Propagation and Exploits

    This worm takes advantage of the Remote Procedure Call (RPC) Distributed Component Object Model (DCOM) vulnerability present on Windows XP systems, which allows an attacker to gain full access and execute any code on a target machine, leaving it compromised. Read more on this vulnerability from the following link:

    Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-026

    It also takes advantage of the Buffer Overflow in SQL Server 2000 vulnerability. Read more on this vulnerability from the following link:

    Microsoft Security Bulletin MS02-061

    This worm also exploits the IIS5/WEBDAV buffer overrun vulnerability affecting Windows NT platforms, which enables arbitrary codes to execute on the server. The following link offers more information from Microsoft about this vulnerability:

    Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-007

    It also exploits the Windows LSASS vulnerability. This is a buffer overrun vulnerability that allows remote code execution. Once successfully exploited, a remote attacker is able to gain full control of the affected system. For more information about this vulnerability, refer to the following Microsoft Web site:

    Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-011
    This worm spreads via network shares, using NetBEUI functions to get available lists of user names and passwords. It then searches for and lists down the following shared folders, where it drops a copy of itself using the gathered information:
    • Admin$\system32
    • C$\windows\system32
    • C$\winnt\system32
    • Ipc$
    Trend Micro reports that the worm runs on Windows 95, 98, ME, NT, 2000, and XP. But notice that they report that the worm as not in the wild. So... where is it? Did they get a prerelease?
    --
    // Beyond Here Lie Dragons
    1. Re:More technical details by terraformer · · Score: 2, Funny
      But notice that they report that the worm as not in the wild. So... where is it? Did they get a prerelease?
      At least the crackers won't be getting a vaporware award this year. How long have people been waiting for DNF??? Maybe 3dRealms can hire some of these coders and put them to marginally better use...
      --
      Who are you? The new #2 Who is #1? You are #617565. I am not a number, I am a free man! Muhahaha.
    2. Re:More technical details by fitten · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How does Windows XP SP2 Data Execution Prevention handle this? or does it? (sounds like all those buffer overrun/overflow exploits should be stopped)

    3. Re:More technical details by baadfood · · Score: 4, Funny

      Duh! They made it themselves of course!

    4. Re:More technical details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      All the holes exploited were patched before XP SP2: SP2 already contains fixes for them.

    5. Re:More technical details by Manitcor · · Score: 2

      all of the listed sploits being used by this worm have patches that have been realesed. As with most MS platform worms, virii and trojans they take advatange of the fact that the average windows user/net admin does not know or care to take the time to make sure thier systems are properly patched and secured.

      --
      "Don't mess with him, he taunts the happy fun ball."
    6. Re:More technical details by AvitarX · · Score: 2, Insightful

      or that they are on dialup and can't keep up (home users, a little under half anyway).

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    7. Re:More technical details by AC-x · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Still I'd be interested to know if SP2's Data Execution Prevention would have stopped this if the holes hadn't been patched.

      Doing proactive fixes like this should be better the reatively fixing holes as they appear so it would be interesting to know how well this latest feature works.

      Also I never really understood why there are always so many buffer overrun problems in software, I know it's a bit more complex then
      while(readdata() && bufferlimit--){}
      but still...

    8. Re:More technical details by numark · · Score: 2, Informative

      The comment was more along the lines of, had those patches never been created in the first place, would SP2's Data Execution Prevention still prevent the problem? After all, "Prevention" implies a proactive system, so it should be able to prevent the problem even if a patch doesn't even exist.

      --
      Want Slashdot headlines on your site? Try SlashHead
    9. Re:More technical details by Atrax · · Score: 2, Informative
      --
      Screw you all! I'm off to the pub
    10. Re:More technical details by rkrabath · · Score: 2, Funny

      EVERY ONE GET THEIR FREE COPY OF SP2!!!!


      Do your part to bleed the evil empire dry!

      --
      Who do I have to blackmail to get some representation around here!?!?!?!?
    11. Re:More technical details by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Duh! They made it themselves of course!

      I know that was probably meant to be funny but really it's a little disturbing because it seems like it's actually the case.

      Very frequently the major players in the Antivirus market are either having the viruses "before they show up in the wild" or less than "hours" before people start reporting initial infection.

      It doesn't take a paranoid individual to conclude the obvious.

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    12. Re:More technical details by KDR_11k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The SP2 CD came out long after those exploits were first used, you need to apply the patches the day they come out to prevent an infection. Supplying less critical patches via an SP CD is acceptable, but these exploits will get you if you patch too late.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    13. Re:More technical details by Net_Wakker · · Score: 2, Informative
      Microsoft will ship the [XP SP2] CD to you free of charge.
      true, but for a lot of languages the cdreleasedate is september 14 or later (check your own link), besides which MS states on that same page "Please allow approximately 4-6 weeks for shipping." So were I running XP, and on dial-up, I could'nt install SP2 before mid-october.
  3. How much longer? by cbrocious · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How much longer before worms use their own TCP/IP stack? Wouldn't much suprise me, and might be beneficial for getting around firewalls. Might be a cool little project to make a zoo virus that does it.

    --
    Disconnect and self-destruct, one bullet at a time.
    1. Re:How much longer? by einhverfr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think it took this long because it took this long for viruses to become a tool of organized computer crime. Stay tuned for more.....

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  4. New worms... by Nos. · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The newest MyDoom variant has the author asking for a job...
    http://www.vnunet.com/news/1158043
    The arnus worm speaks to infected users.
    I don't know if I should laugh or cry. I just know I'm getting calls in the next few days because someone's computer says "How are you...".

  5. Encrypt! by WD_40 · · Score: 5, Informative

    As demonstrated at DEFCON with "The Wall of Sheep" (stupid name, cool idea) it seems that a lot of people who should know better still don't encrypt their password transmissions.

    If you haven't already, it's time to get serious about encryption.

    --

    "With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine." -- RFC 1925

    1. Re:Encrypt! by koreth · · Score: 4, Interesting
      That won't help you if you're infected by this worm, which does keystroke logging. You can encrypt your password six ways from Sunday and it will still have been intercepted before it ever reaches your encryption software.

      Not that I'm against encryption or anything. But it won't necessarily stop your passwords from being stolen.

    2. Re:Encrypt! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, if you're running Windows you can get infected with this or any of the myriad other worms, some of which install keyloggers. The unique thing about this is that it installs a NETWORK SNIFFER and not a keylogger on the box, meaning that other machines on the same network can get "sniffed" even if they're not infected.

      The upshot is that all of those people who normally ignore virus alerts because they run Linux [Slashdot audience] need to confirm they encrypt everything and then go about ignoring these alerts again. ...either that or convert that one last "compatibility" machine from Windows to Linux.

    3. Re:Encrypt! by dasmegabyte · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I used to use an encryption program that attempted to get around keystroke loggers...by remapping your keyboard when you were in the password box. A keystroke logger would see gobbeltygook...granted, it was a simple cipher, but since there isn't enough information in a single 16 character password to generate a key for such a cipher, it was still pretty secure.

      I stopped using it when I got my mac, because built in AES-128 is just easier than mucking about with encrypted disk drivers and suchlike. I don't have that much to keep secure anyway...just some receipts, beer recipes and incriminating photos

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    4. Re:Encrypt! by rainer_d · · Score: 4, Informative

      > You can encrypt your password six ways from
      > Sunday and it will still have been intercepted
      > before it ever reaches your encryption software.

      Indeed. But there's that nice Squirrelmail plugin that lets you use a virtual keyboard to enter your password ;-)

      Rainer

      --
      Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
  6. A few points by Meostro · · Score: 5, Interesting
    1. A Link to Trend Micro's SDBot.UH analysis

    2. I love the fact that this worm drops itself as BLING.EXE

    3. This worm uses carnivore network sniffer and checks for the following strings
    As Taco said, I'm surprised it's taken this long. Considering it uses 5 patched vulnerabilities I'd say you deserve what you get in this case.

    4. This is particularly... clever? It does all kinds of things that I would put in as feature requests for the perfect worm
    • It has 6 paths of infection: 5 vulnerabilities (as above) plus open shares
    • It attempts to steal CD keys for some games.
    • It installs a network sniffer
    • It has an interface with 26 commands that the bad guys can use on an 0wned box
    • It can log keystrokes
    It doesn't destory anything all by itself, although it probably crashes some boxen through the exploits (was that just Sasser, or is that part of the LSASS flaw?) It still sucks, but it's just an expected evolution.

    I'm still waiting for the really bad one...
    1. Re:A few points by savagedome · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm still waiting for the really bad one...

      A really bad one would look for Excel/Word files and modify a couple of data entries in a huge list of numbers.

      Kind of like someone breaking into the house, leaving something obnoxious under the fridge that starts smelling bad really gradually over a period of few months.

      Imagine the look on the PHB's face when 6 months down the line he realizes while doing some entires in the sheet that the p/e ratio is negative!

    2. Re:A few points by ricotest · · Score: 5, Funny

      As soon as your comment was posted, a dozen hackers got to work on a virus that does exactly what you describe. Thanks for helping fuck up my reports, asshole.

    3. Re:A few points by randomiam · · Score: 4, Funny
      "inusable"?

      That's unpossible, isn't it?

    4. Re:A few points by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The really bad ones are already out in the wild, and they do not damage your data.

      They wait 'till you go to an HTTPS site and then they log your keystrokes. It's about cash money for the villains, and not doing anything to get caught.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    5. Re:A few points by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It attempts to steal CD keys for some games.

      This was part of my argument for the ridiculousness of a developer making an app delete a user's home directory when a pirated key is found.

      1. user buys shareware. one of the honest 1%, if statistics can be believed.
      2. user loses unique use of the shareware key to worm/keygen
      3. shareware key spreads, and is labelled a pirate version
      4. original user updates their shareware app, shareware app nukes their home folder.

    6. Re:A few points by dasmegabyte · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I saw a few nasty viruses back in college...Empire Monkey was one, wrecked your MBR and just enough data to mean a reinstall was inevitable. One that manipulated the MBR and the lock-up bug on the Pentium processor. Finally, there was a notorious Word virus called Meat Grinder. Did nothing for the first few dozen saves, then overwrote your file on disk with complete gibberish.

      Saw a graduate student reduced to sobbing over that last one...her teacher was a real prick and wouldn't take anything late for any reason and she had not been educated on the importance of multiple backups. It was 2 am the day before it was due and no amount of Norton Disk Doctor was going to save her (luckily, she'd been on a machine the day before and just shut it down, we had 13 of 20 pages autosaved). I had to call him the next day, and he didn't believe me. I wound up refering him to the head of academic computing, who essentially told the guy that this was the worst virus he'd ever seen and it would be utterly heartless not to give the girl an extension. Dr. Wolf was the MAN.

      All of these spread via diskettes and public terminals. Be glad nobody's applied these concepts to an internet worm. We'd be fucked.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    7. Re:A few points by bobbozzo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There was a destructive internet worm recently.
      It attacked PC's via a hole in BlackICE firewall.

      After reproducing for a little while, it began randomly overwriting sectors on the HD. Eventually your OS (and probably a lot of data) would be fubar.

      URL: http://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/witty.shtml

      --
      Nothing to see here; Move along.
    8. Re:A few points by EngMedic · · Score: 4, Funny

      I still think the best (worst?) virus would delete one card at random from solitare....

      --
      filter: +3. Hey, look! all the trolls went away!
    9. Re:A few points by Guido+von+Guido · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I have a friend who just got her M.A. My advice to her was to print her thesis (or the new portions of it) at least once a week until she was done with it.

      Yeah, it would have been hell to type it all over again, but it would have beat having to rewrite it from scratch.

    10. Re:A few points by dasmegabyte · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Signs don't help. For many people, it takes an accident to realize how stupid it is to keep the only copy of their 40 page doctoral thesis folded at the bottom of a purse. After that, they get a little nuts. This is where stories are useful. People come in, ask for some help, and while you're helping them out, tell them the Meat Grinder story. Or the story about the lady who lost her disc and closed without saving, meaning the only remaining copy of her thesis was currently printing on a dot matrix printer (which began to come out of alignment at page 5).

      We used to (try) to train people to use their email account and their mainframe storage (which most people didn't even know they had) to save files to. Even set up Samba so users could mount their mainframe space as a drive and save directly to it. The Mainframe, we explained, was backed up incrementally throughout the day and periodically virus scanned. It couldn't be wrecked or stolen. It couldn't be read by other students unless you set it that way. It was like sealing your files in a sterile vault (which, indeed, was where the server was stored) and it was no harder than using a disk.

      But most people just ignored us. After all, what could happen to the disk? It was inside of a little red plastic case with a metal shutter! Never mind that it was stuffed into crummy pockets or inside a backpack along with a collection of rare earth magnets...it was in a PLASTIC CASE!

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
  7. I'm still waiting... by 00Sovereign · · Score: 3, Interesting

    for the "INDUCEd PATRIOT" worm that detects P2P traffic and then promptly shuts down the computer.

    --
    "Me fail English, that's unpossible." --Ralphie
  8. Oh no by antifoidulus · · Score: 3, Funny

    my password to asianthumbs.org may have been jepeordized!
    Oh no, I have said too much!
    Damn you autopr0n, why, why did you have to die!!!

    1. Re:Oh no by IthnkImParanoid · · Score: 3, Funny

      Finally! I've been looking everywhere for a thumbs-fetish site!

      Thank you antifoidulus! I no longer feel so alone!

      --
      It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
  9. Easily avoided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    .. if your network smells bad.

  10. Squawker by swordboy · · Score: 4, Interesting
    --

    Life is the leading cause of death in America.
  11. Proper switches will defeat the sniffer by Jailbrekr · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you have a proper switch, then sniffing should not be a problem, as the traffic on the network will not reach the infected computer (unless it is also a server). Sadly, I fear that alot of the consumer "switches" on the market do not do proper routing, and have insufficient mac routing tables.

    --
    Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
    1. Re:Proper switches will defeat the sniffer by khrtt · · Score: 2, Informative

      I fear that alot of the consumer "switches" on the market do not do proper routing

      All home routers I've seen (dlink, linksys, smc, belkin) do route, but only between the outside and the inside. On the inside, the 4 ports are on a regular hub, so no routing. This is appropriate for the normal usage pattern, 4 computers connected through the router to the evel internet. The sniffer would work fine. If the thing can sniff bank-account passwords from victims' home computers, it should give the author more than enough money to steal.

    2. Re:Proper switches will defeat the sniffer by dtperik · · Score: 2, Interesting
      If you have a proper switch, then sniffing should not be a problem, as the traffic on the network will not reach the infected computer...
      And then the next version uses technology like ettercap which can sniff on switched networks.
    3. Re:Proper switches will defeat the sniffer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hubs, switches and routers are three different pieces of network equipment.

      Hubs are collapsed ethernet busses: Every attached device can see every ethernet frame sent by any other attached device.

      Switches work on a higher layer: They inspect the frames and send only broadcast frames to all devices. For the rest of the frames, they maintain a table of MAC-layer addresses of all devices attached to the switch ports. Targeted frames only get sent to the port to which the target device is connected.

      Routers work on an even higher level: They inspect IP packets and do with them about the same as what switches do with ethernet frames. Routers are generally more flexible about the rules regarding the packet flow than switches. It is not uncommon for routers to have the ability to perform switch-like ethernet level functions as well, but conceptually routing and switching are two different beasts.

      At least cheap home switches can be tricked into passing frames to the "wrong" ports in several ways. One method is to flood the MAC-address-to-port table. Most switches then fall back into hub mode. Generally speaking, non-manageable switches and switches without clearly-defined reactions to MAC flooding are not security devices. You should assume that an attacker can read your packets on a switched network.

    4. Re:Proper switches will defeat the sniffer by stor · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you flood the arp cache of most switches they will failover to behaving like a hub. There are other tricks as well.

      Switches don't route, they switch: they're a layer 2 device.

      I have a AU$25 switch that *is* a switch. I've tested it (not hard to test: I used tcpdump). Noone seems to be building hubs anymore because it's become so damn cheap to build a switch.

      Also the "switching" nature of a switch is more for performance reasons rather than security. A switch can store the packets in a small buffer then forward them to the relevant port for full duplex operation and collision-prevention. A hub is a half-duplex device.

      Don't guess, test, read, learn.

      Cheers
      Stor

      --
      "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
  12. Non-malicious worms by MisterP · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "When I read these things it kind of makes me wonder why it took this long."

    I often wonder the same thing. With all the different worms that infect unpatced Windows machines, why hasn't someone wrote one that effectively deletes everything on the machine just short of rendering itself unable to propogate?

    1. Re:Non-malicious worms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Like any good natural virus, it wants to remain as long as possible so that it may continue spreading. If it deletes noticeable things, people will take action to remove it. If it stays mostly hidden, just spamming/monitoring/etc and spreading, it will be far more successful.

    2. Re:Non-malicious worms by newend · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you delete everything on the machine, then the virus can't propagate. What would have to happen is the virus would have to have a delay, and then there is a risk that it will be discovered before the payload (deletion) takes place. Futher, I think most of the virus writers think of it more as a game, and don't really want to destroy data so much as see what they can accomplish. Would you rather destroy Rome or own it?

  13. Is it just me.... by grolschie · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...or does the term "packet sniffer" remind anyone of someones pet dog?

    1. Re:Is it just me.... by Oxy+the+moron · · Score: 5, Funny

      I believe that would be "package sniffer" if I'm not mistaken. ;)

      --

      Proudly supporting the Libertarian Party.

  14. Hackers Vs RIAA by Skedoozy · · Score: 3, Funny

    We need someone to go after these people with the intensity that the RIAA goes after 13 year old girls who don't want to pay for Hoobastank songs. If only the hackers would start going after people like the RIAA instead of trying to screw the everyday person out of their information so they can buy more mods for their Xbox. Then we could air it on MTV as Celebrity Geek Match!

    1. Re:Hackers Vs RIAA by dasmegabyte · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The RIAA is doing the only thing that copyright owners CAN do to protect their copyrights: they're pursuing legal damages for material copied without permission. They don't know whether it's 13 year old girls or the fucking mafia...all they have is a list of IP addresses of people serving one or more copyrighted songs. What are they supposed to do when it turns out that some of these file sharers are young kids or grand parents or the handicapped? Say, "oops, sorry, you're allowed to infringe however you like, it's only infringement if you're a healthy white male aged 18-35?"

      The RIAA is doing what I'd do if I saw a threat to my business: they're trying to curb the threat with the only means available to them by law. Complain about the cost if you like, or the tactics, or the copyright laws themselves, but you can't complain about them trying to protect their business in a legal way. That's ridiculous.

      Just about as ridiculous as wishing for them to be inconvenienced by hackers, really. I mean, what you're talking about is called a protection racket in the Real World(tm), and it's fucking illegal.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
  15. I don't know about you.... by soulsteal · · Score: 4, Funny

    ..but I, for one, don't care about our network-sniffing overlords.

    1. Re:I don't know about you.... by soulsteal · · Score: 2, Funny

      Me neither.

  16. Scary by StevenHenderson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Personally, I find this scary as shit. I think virii like this are going to be the reasons to compel a lot of middle-ability users to switch to Linux. Hell, I might cast off Windows now once and for all...

    1. Re:Scary by agm · · Score: 2, Informative

      That would be a good thing, IMO.

      The problem with a sniffer virus like this is that it can sniff network data that comes from any OS, not just the infected one. So in this case this Windows only virus is a bad thing for Linux users as well (assuming the Linux users are sending plain-text passwords and the like).

    2. Re:Scary by DogDude · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Personally, I find this scary as shit. I think virii like this are going to be the reasons to compel a lot of middle-ability users to switch to Linux.

      The only thing that Linux has got going for itself right now is security through obscurity. If Linux ever becomes popular as a desktop platform, I'm willing to bet my life that we'll start seeing worms targeting it, too.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    3. Re:Scary by archivis · · Score: 2, Funny

      Make up a word, if in your using it you transfer the idea you wanted to convey...congratulations!

      You just participated in a living language. Screw the pedants and their rules.

      --
      In July O7, I got a mac pro. There's no punchline. Just endless joy and wonder.
    4. Re:Scary by Greyfox · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Yeah, but the average user doesn't care about security. If they did, they'd have actually run Windows update and patched their systems against the vulnerabilities that this worm exploits. Same said users would move over to Linux, never patch their systems and have their systems taken over the next time a remote exploit is found.

      In fact, the average user either got a copy of Windows with their computer and never upgraded it, or they pirated a version of Windows and are not able to download updates. They always say the same thing too. "Oh, I'm just one computer out on the net! They'd never notice my computer out there!"

      That's why I think Internet usage should require a license. If you connect to it without knowing what you're doing, you're putting everyone in danger. Potentially at least as much danger as broadcasting on a ham radio without knowing what you're doing.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    5. Re:Scary by TiggertheMad · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah it's flonrky and sometimes kjimpul to mnaku the skroojules for all the walliwallis in the tumbputu.

      Don't you agree?

      --

      HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    6. Re:Scary by SCHecklerX · · Score: 2, Insightful
      nowadays, most linux distros ship with most services disabled by default, with the option of enabling iptables as part of the install. True, there could be a daemon that could propagate a worm, but it is not as likely to be running on an end user workstation.

      Compare this to windows, which has no easy way to disable dcom, rpc, and such.

  17. I dont even get the purpose.... by stickystyle · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Most networks are switched these days, making this pointless. Why not install a keylogger???
    Then the evil person doesnt have to deal with all the encryption mumbo-jumbo.

    --
    Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate
    1. Re:I dont even get the purpose.... by aelbric · · Score: 2, Informative

      The idea is to sniff the infected computer, not it's connected network. Works wonders even on switched LANS. Once you're running local, the net infrastructure is meaningless.

      --
      nos laetus epulor qui would domito nos
  18. What if someone made a worm that just........ by ARRRLovin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ......ran windows update on all infected machines? Would people get pissed?

    --
    -Randy
    1. Re:What if someone made a worm that just........ by wiggles · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's been done. See this writeup for the Welchia virus.

      This thing actually caused more problems at my site in the form of network saturation than the blaster worm it was written to eradicate!

    2. Re:What if someone made a worm that just........ by still_sick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ......ran windows update on all infected machines? Would people get pissed?

      Would people get pissed? HELL YES.

      I recall one particularly annoying weekend when my computer DVD player stopped working. Something screwed up or something - whatever it was, the damn video was not being decoded properly.

      Tried everything I could think of. New Drive, New Drivers, endless newsgroup searching, blah blah blah to no avail.

      Then it occured to me that between the time that my DVD player last worked and then did not, I had installed Win2k SP4.

      So just as a test I went and uninstalled the bastard, everything worked FINE after that - with the original HW/SW configuration.

      So now I'm not installing SP4 because it BREAKS MY SYSTEM - not because I'm unaware of it, or too stupid to install it.

      I don't need nor want some dumbass "I'm smarter than you, and doing this for your own good" 1337 prick trying to install SP4 for me.

      --
      ...Also, I didn't know Buggalo could fly.
    3. Re:What if someone made a worm that just........ by Telastyn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And no offense, but if your machine is exploitable enough for someone to remotely patch it, a broken dvd player is the least of your worries.

    4. Re:What if someone made a worm that just........ by mikeg22 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I don't need nor want some dumbass "I'm smarter than you, and doing this for your own good" 1337 prick trying to install SP4 for me
      A worm like this would only be able to get into computers that are unprotected, so assuming you're a security concious fellow, you wouldn't have to worry about it. Now, if your computer was vulnerable, wouldn't it be better that your computer gets patched (and possibly screws up your dvd player) than having an unprotected machine waiting to get hosed by some hacker?

      I'm actually sypathetic to the belief that a vulnerable computer connected to the internet is a hazard to the internet as a whole, as it can easily become a DDOS/Spam zombie, and therefore somebody is in the right to patch the hole, through nefarious means if necessary.
  19. I installed my sniffer on a computer once... by rwven · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...Afterwards it took me over an hour to unscrew the side of my case to get my nose out...

  20. Use of switches? by chrispyman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Since its pretty rare these days to see either a computer attached to a hub (vs a switch) and its also unlikely to see a Windows based router, wouldn't this make the worms payload only applicable in most cases to the computer that gets infects. Also, I note it spreads through several other well known exploits, and you'd think people would have realized to patch and cleanup against these after MSBlast and Nimda.

    1. Re:Use of switches? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Switches are all well and good, but you forget about cable modems. While downstream traffic is only sent to the modem, all upstream traffic using QAM encoding techniques is a shared medium, so a sniffer on that wire could get some interesting traffic.

      Packet sniffers are not a good thing to have just running, but an auto-propogating one is even worse, and should not be taken lightly.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  21. Passwords!?! by vijaya_chandra · · Score: 2, Funny

    The article says

    "This in turn enables the attacker to capture unencrypted usernames and passwords, which can be used to compromise additional machines on the network. "

    What would one gain looking at unencrypted passwords!?!
    They would anyway be strings of *s only. right!?!?

    Or can someone look through these *s as they look through the matrix code!!

  22. One reason I quit fixing Windows by teamhasnoi · · Score: 3, Interesting
    is that it's a never-ending job, when the user is at the keyboard, doing things that I would never do.

    I've been telling my old 'customers' that I'm retired. I then tell them that I will give them support for free for life if they buy a Mac.

    This is usually met with, 'Wha? Really?"

    Yup. I'm enjoying the stories of crazy Windows happenings, virus mystery, and constant crashing (Yeah, XP is ok, but not when you have 127 viruses, trojans, spyware and keyloggers all vying for a clock cycle and outgoing port.)

    And I'm especially loving not working on Windows boxes.

    1. Re:One reason I quit fixing Windows by selderrr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Personally, no OS is secure. Period.

      Your argument against OSX hold against linux/BSD/whatever open source OS. As soon as the number of users reaches critical mass, it becomes "profitable" for virus writes. More so as zombie macines are being used as bulk mailers. And you can bet the farm that in a few years, those zombies will be used for much more stuff than simple spamming. How about al-qaeda brute-forcing entry to a big bank by using 100.000 PCs to crack the password, and then simply start transfering tiny amounts of cash around. It would take days before someone noticed, and by then practically impossible to restore from backup.

      IMHO, the real evil on the net still has to rise. The virii and script kddies you see today are just the scouts of the first reconaissance divisions of the army of the black lord.

    2. Re:One reason I quit fixing Windows by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As soon as the number of users reaches critical mass, it becomes "profitable" for virus writes.

      Market saturation is only one element toward attracting malware. Another is security. If a system is popular enough, no doubt malware will be created for it, at least as a proof of concept. However, malware will never spread in the wild unless the system has insufficient security (by definition). I'm not claiming that any of today's operating systems has perfect security, but some are better than others.

  23. uIP already exists... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Seems like the uIP embedded TCP/IP stack would be ideal for this, as it is very small and portable. Also, it apparently already has been ported to and run on laptop keyboard microcontrollers. How about that kind of sniffer virus!

  24. What's new about that? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 3, Informative

    ... a new worm installs a network sniffer ... it kind of makes me wonder why it took this long.

    What's new about that?

    Network sniffers installed on compromised machines is the ENTIRE REASON DMZs were invented - so the network sniffer can only sniff the DMZ, not the LAN behind the second packet-filtering router/bridge.

    DMZs have been standard practice for over a decade. If there's anything new about this, it's just that it's the first time a worm in the wild has been identified as installing a sniffer.

    But that's hardly surprising. The explosion of professionally-engineered worms is quite recent, as is consumer-level deployment of multi-machine LANs behind firewall+NAT appliances. (I'd expect packet-sniffing cracks aimed at businesses to be more targeted rather than worm-style scatterguns, if only to reduce their chances of discovery.) Seems to me the time became ripe JUST NOW for general deployment of a sniffer-installing Microsoft-exploiting worm.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:What's new about that? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2, Informative

      Aside from the IIS bug, wtf would a DMZ matter? Seriously, we're talking about a worm that spreads via freaking network shares. What are you thinking...that each Windows machine live in its own DMZ? Or maybe you're just talking out of your ass...

      Servers on the DMZ provide services to the rest of the net, and thus are hosts that can be attacked through vulnerabilities in their service-providing protocols. This made such servers the likely points of compromise. Putting them on a DMZ that is isolated from the corporate LAN kept such compromises from sniffing the LAN - where inside-the-firewall desktop machines would be exchnging valuable data without further layers of protection. Exploits of compromised servers (and the use of a DMZ to isolate them) have been a problem (and solution) for a LONG time.

      Note the past tense.

      Attacks on workstations behind the firewalls by email viruses (i.e. trojan-horse attachments to emails including a self-remailing action) have also been with us for a while. Potentially these could (and occasionally did) install keyboard sniffers. But a LAN sniffer payload does not seem to have been common. Perhaps this is because LAN sniffer payloads would typically be directed at a particular target, and so be attached to NON-replicating trojan email directed toward users on the target LAN.

      Very recently, worms (propagating software modules that do NOT require human interaction to spread) graduated from a theoretical possibilty to a common scourge. And they have even more recently been adopted by profit-making criminal enterprises - first spammers, then other scammers (such as phishers). So there is plenty of money available to engineer them for more function.

      Some recent worms have included keyboard sniffers and filters to reduce the data, detecting and extracting the items of interest (i.e. account numbers and passwords of users of major banking institutions). This represents a breakthrough: Data reduction on the compromised machine, to limit the traffic on the collection sites to a pre-screened pithy dribble.

      At that point, general distribution of LAN packet sniffers in worm payloads (rather than directed infection as non-reproducing trojans) becomes a practical matter. The sniffer can use the infected machine to sort out the traffic of interest, rather than flooding the collector with junk (just as the viral keyboard sniffers with filtering can).

      But it also becomes desirable to do LAN rather than keyboard sniffing - because with LAN sniffing the traffic of NON-compromised machines can also be sniffed. A Windows machine on a corporate LAN or a personal LAN behind a firewall+NAT appliance becomes a threat to the traffic of Macs, Linux boxes, BSD boxes, and other tougher targets.

      So the appearance of a LAN-sniffing worm shortly after the worm explosion and the appearance of keyboard-sniffing, data-reducing viruses is right on the expected evolutionary timetable.

      As for having "each Windows machine live in its own DMZ", putting all the windows machines on another DMZ separated from the other internal servers might be a good idea about now.

      Further, some of the security solutions currently being deployed amount to monitoring the Windows machines' (or their individual applications') behavior to identify infection, and cutting off the machines (or killing the affected applications) if they appear compromised. This may not amount to putting each one on its own DMZ, but it's getting closer.

      And the use of switches, rather than hubs, to connect the machines in a *-base-T LAN, amounts to EXACTLY "each machine [on] its own DMZ", at least as far as sniffing unicast LAN traffic is concerned. It doesn't block active probing - but that's what those other solutions I mentioned are about.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  25. oh no by teamhasnoi · · Score: 3, Funny
    Please don't forward this link to any virus authors!

    We could all be doooooooomed!

  26. SSL for everything by Matt+Perry · · Score: 4, Interesting
    from the hope-you're-using-ssl-for-everything dept.
    Why aren't we using SSL for everything? Why aren't we building strong encryption into everything? I started wondering this several months ago when I had to run VNC on a windows box and had no way to secure it. Sure, under linux you can tunnel it over SSH, but that wasn't an option on a windows machine.

    And regarding another thing, how come so many services require a certificate (such as SSL with email, imap, pop, etc) rather than auto-negotiating it like SSH does?

    --
    Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    1. Re:SSL for everything by bluewee · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think you are forgetting OpenSSH and Cygwin.

      --
      [blue] - The Ministry of Information approved this message...
    2. Re:SSL for everything by hab136 · · Score: 2, Informative
      how come so many services require a certificate (such as SSL with email, imap, pop, etc) rather than auto-negotiating it like SSH does?

      The idea is that you can verify the certificate belongs to who it says it belongs to (like www.yourbank.com), without exchanging any other communication (such as SSH's fingerprints) - you just verify the site's signature from Verisign (or whomever). SSH relies on you confirming the fingerprint the first time you connect.

      You can generate your own SSL certs if you don't care about proving them to anyone. Check out the apache docs for examples. Then, once you've accepted it the first time, you'll have no more prompts on further connects - exactly like SSH.

      See, for example, http://www.apache-ssl.org/#FAQ, "Now I've got my server installed, how do I create a test certificate?"

    3. Re:SSL for everything by Moridineas · · Score: 2, Informative

      I believe UltraVnc (what I use, mostly) has an ecryption plugin?

      as for services--I don't believe any of the SSH clients can run as a service.. I'd be very surprised if there isn't some software out there that could do that though--would be a good project :-p

    4. Re:SSL for everything by MightyYar · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Hey! I'm a pretty solidly geeky dork, and all my passwords for work are on a sticky. Why?

      • At last count, I have at least 7 passwords: email and network, customer page, unix login, bugs database, data modeler, applications database, code review process. I'm probably missing some, I'd have to check the sticky.
      • The passwords are not changed at the same time, so they are all different. They may have abandoned trying to make us change them periodically - I'm not sure, the schedule was so erratic.
      • All the systems have different rules about what format the password must take. They definitely don't do a dictionary check, because sometimes I use things like "fuckyou" or "screwit". Juvenile, I know.
      • Even though they do not seem to care what your password is, they DO check to make sure that it is different than the last six times. This leads to passwords like: kilroy, kilroy1, kilroy2, killroy3, etc.
      • My IT department actually had a file on the server with everyone's plain text password for at least two of the systems. It was in Excel and was accessible to anyone with a login. Morons - why does such a file even exist??? Apparently they were doing something to everyone's PC and so they put it on the server so their support guys could reference it while they went from PC to PC, then forgot to take it back down. The list was very enlightening. Many people simply used their first name as the password, appending a 1 or 2 whenever they had to change it.

      Anyway, I'm using a sticky because it really doesn't matter.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  27. Question by prostoalex · · Score: 2, Informative

    Cannot check this right now, but wouldn't it be possible to write a Windows executable that writes to the HOSTS file? The file is at a known location, and couldn't you add a line to redirect msn.com and yahoo.com to your own site?

    Seems like a fairly simple exploit.

  28. A machine on one of our networks.... by caluml · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is strange - I found a bling.exe on a Windows machine at work a while ago, as it was spewwing out 445 if I remember rightly - several weeks. I searched for info on it, and I didn't find anything, which I thought was strange.
    I think I must have got hit by an early-adopter version.

    1. Re:A machine on one of our networks.... by Mathness · · Score: 3, Funny

      I think I must have got hit by an early-adopter version.

      *envy*

      You got selected to be a beta tester of a virus! That is so 1337 man :)

      --
      Carbon based humanoid in training.
  29. Worms are just like any other software by ChiralSoftware · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Remember back to the days of MS-DOS? Everything was very minimal and non-bloated, but still, things were slow. As computers got faster, software didn't get faster. It just got more bloated to take advantage of all that new speed and memory available. Today I have dozens of windows open, a media player, and IDE, mail reader, etc, and you need 256mb to run Linux or Windows XP. That's bloat. But, they do a lot more than they used to. Much much more.

    And it's the same with worms. Rather than hand-coding them in assembly to get them in under 1000 bytes (or whatever) they can now be developed with good tools, useful libraries, and they can have all kinds of extra functionality built in. So expect worms with more features as we go along.

    It's time to really start thinking about security-by-design. VM systems like Java, or capability-based systems like EROS are the way we are going to finally squish these worms. I'm so tired of helping relatives with anti-virus software. There shouldn't be anti-virus software. Operating systems shouldn't allow viruses and worms to exist. Security problems like this are not an inherent part of software.

    1. Re:Worms are just like any other software by megaversal · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not to be incredibly pro-MS, but the reason it's so easy to write all these viruses is because MS tried to make it easy to do all sorts of things with your system. VBScript can be and is used for automating administration tasks all the time, yet someone can use it to write some pretty complex worm in very few lines. Not elegant, but easy.

      I see the problem being Windows, by default, letting you run as an administrator, instead of a normal-level user, so that when a virus hits, the damage is far less if it can't change certain files, and run with a certain level of power.

      It's still not as easy to run as an everyday user, switching to Administrator whenever you need to perform an admin task, as it is on *nix to switch back and forth, at least in my experience. And I admin a primarily Windows network everyday, but use *nix only on a personal level.

      So I like the idea that MS gives you all this ability to create and play using technologies that aren't as hard to master as assembly (in the practical sense.. it's harder to write a simple Windows app in assembly than it is in VB), but they're still working on (in my opinion) getting users away from running as admin/root the whole time.

      --
      Sig!
    2. Re:Worms are just like any other software by evn · · Score: 3, Funny

      drip-drip-drip method of torture

      So all I have to do is wait a couple more years! Then I will buy a naked machine, connect it to the internet, and in minutes a full OS will be installed by a worm! The best part is that it will probably be more up to date than the Windows machines spreading this garbage.

      Maybe I should patch emacs to propagate itself and get the jump on the script kiddies ;)

  30. A question... by here4fun · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Where does the sniffer send its data to? For someone to benifit from the data, they need to access it. So why don't people follow the data and find out who wrote it?

    1. Re:A question... by cosmol · · Score: 2, Informative

      the trend micro link kindly provided in this comment says that it connects to an irc server.

  31. Need one that does some damage by bdigit · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dear Worm Writers,

    Please create a worm that will actually destroy the users harddrive that way at work when they call up I can tell them its a hardware problem and we do not support that. Also it will teach everyone a valuable lesson in running windows update and enabling their firewalls.

    Thank you
    Student worker @ University Helpdesk

    1. Re:Need one that does some damage by bluewee · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Although this is marked funny, I have considered doing this to a lesser extent. My plan would be to write a virus that used the back doors of other worms, virus(virii) and get onto the system and break the TCP/IP stack, and change the Background image to a link that would have all the information on how to clean up their computer.

      Even though this has legal implication, I think that people would be happy to know that their computer has been infected, and how to fix it.

      --
      [blue] - The Ministry of Information approved this message...
    2. Re:Need one that does some damage by Dr.Dubious+DDQ · · Score: 3, Funny

      Heck, I'm still waiting for the one that uses the infected PC's existing saved emails to attach itself to and forward itself with. It'll be "funny" when major corporate executives start having their private, confidential, Microsoft(r) Outlook(tm) corporate emails spewed out to random people on the internet along with the virus...corporate budget planning emails, deal negotiations...it's all there...

  32. yep! by Zilfondel2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yea, actually, a lot of the time the virus writers DO email them to the different antivirus companies. Having your virus added to the weekly virus definition files is part of their bragging rights.

    Do you really think there are 55,000 viruses in the wild?

    Yea yea, I worked for symantec for a couple of years.

    1. Re:yep! by f8free · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've always wondered about that kind of thing... most especially, what's to stop the antivirus companies from writing their own virii?

      Not that they'd need to do it at this point, but talk about your perpetual business model...

    2. Re:yep! by UranusReallyHertz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I had the same thought about spam-control companies. They have no interest in actually stopping spam because that would put them out of business.

      --
      Smoking is an expensive, slow, and unreliable method of suicide.
    3. Re:yep! by returnoftheyeti · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Cure for Cancer - Nope reseachers out of jobs
      Electric cars - Nope, oli companies go bust
      Cigarettes outlawed - Nope, that would kill the Cancer industry, the ashtray industry, the fire estinguisher industry, and the government would lose a lot of tax income.
      Peace in the Middle East, Nope -Bush would be out of a job

    4. Re:yep! by funk49 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There was a lot rumors floating around the BH and anti-viral community abou CodeRed being written by the Chief Hacking Officer at eEye, Marc Maiffret. I've always suspected that is what the companies do. That's how ISS justifies it's subscription model for sigs...X-Force creates craploads of major 0days.

    5. Re:yep! by One+Louder · · Score: 5, Interesting
      ...what's to stop the antivirus companies from writing their own virii?
      The competition.

      Imagine the publicity if an anti-virus software vendor were able to prove that a virus was produced by one of its competitors.

    6. Re:yep! by f8free · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That would be the biggest risk, to be sure. But tracking down the source of a virus is quite difficult, and that's when it's the work of a single (or just a few) hacker(s). Imagine if some corporate muscle were applied in burying the source. I'd worry about whistleblowers, too. Were I an ethically challenged antivirus company CEO, that is.

    7. Re:yep! by numark · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think researchers would be less worried about losing their jobs over a cancer cure (which isn't even guaranteed...there's always something else to research) and more worried about protecting their own health and the health of their families. Doesn't help you in the end if you have a job and die of cancer before you even have a chance to retire. They have as vested an interest in finding a cancer cure as any one of us.

      --
      Want Slashdot headlines on your site? Try SlashHead
    8. Re:yep! by OblvnDrgn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to mention being part of the research team that found the Cure for Cancer (capital letters, it's a Wonder of the World) would probably be enough renown to live on for the rest of your life. Think Watson and Crick touring the university circuit for decades.

    9. Re:yep! by AgentSmith · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Will all you shitbats stop arguing about what the plural of virus is?!!!!

      Every fucking time a virus story comes up, the same (if not similar) group of pedantic twits posts about this. If the world didn't get it the first fucking time you posted it, they aren't going to understand it now!!!

      I declare now once and for all time this will be the word for the plural of virus: Viruses

      There. Is everyone fucking happy now? Can we now get back to discussing the topic and living our lives in a new blissful age now that the plural is definitively known?

      It's a new world people!

    10. Re:yep! by parnasus · · Score: 2, Funny
      it's a Wonder of the World

      And a nice one at that. +1 Happiness in every city, IIRC! :)

      --
      --If you code for the exceptions, the rules fall into place
  33. SSL wouldn't help with a key stroke logger by caluml · · Score: 2, Insightful
    hope-you're-using-ssl-for-everything

    Mmmm, cos that would prevent the key stroke logger from working. It's probably more dangerous if you are using SSL, as you will have that warm fuzzy feeling that all is well, and you'll tap away all your privatest things.

    Bad encryption is worse than no encryption.

  34. Many unswitched networks still exist by loqi · · Score: 3, Informative

    A lot of /.'ers have pointed out that most networks are switched nowadays; however, there are still plenty of networks out there that aren't.

    Every mid-level enthusiast home network I've known was just running a dumb hub, and I'm also familiar with a university that ran hubs per floor in the dorms (you couldn't get floor 8's data on floor 9, but as for everyone on floor 9...). This worm still has a plenty big playground.

    --
    If other reasons we do lack, we swear no one will die when we attack
  35. Re:Best AntiVirus? Help... by jcr · · Score: 5, Informative

    This reminds me, I'm in the process of building a new pc and want to get the opinion of the shack collective on what is the best antivirus software.

    Take your pick: *BSD, SuSE, Red Hat...

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  36. A sniffer would still be helpful... by raehl · · Score: 4, Funny

    Especially if it gives warning messages, like:

    "It is time to empty the litter box."

    or

    "Please do your laundry."

    or

    "Are you really sure you want to eat that leftover pizza?"

    or

    "For the love of god, please try deodorant. Any deodorant."

    Of course, there are also downsides, like your stash of coke always vanishing.

    1. Re:A sniffer would still be helpful... by YetAnotherDave · · Score: 4, Funny

      >> "For the love of god, please try deodorant. Any deodorant."

      we could use this one at my work... :(

    2. Re:A sniffer would still be helpful... by 0racle · · Score: 2, Funny

      net send ....
      The tools are there, use them.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    3. Re:A sniffer would still be helpful... by Short+Circuit · · Score: 3, Informative

      "It is time to empty the litter box."

      If I forget, Mrs. Underfoot lets me know by leaving a present in the middle of the floor. Believe me, I rarely forget.

      "Please do your laundry."

      Done on an as-needed basis. I'll run out, and live off the least-wrinkled shirts until the weekend.

      "Are you really sure you want to eat that leftover pizza?"

      Of-fricken-course! Pizza is the only food I've ever had that's even better microwaved than fresh.

      "For the love of god, please try deodorant. Any deodorant."

      Why? It's not like anyone comes near me...

  37. the bad one by Clover_Kicker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm waiting for a virus that greps all your documents for each name in your address book.

    If a document contains a person's name, email it to them.

    I can see it now, salary spreadsheets and confidential memos flying around to the very people who are not allowed to see them...

    1. Re:the bad one by omnisync · · Score: 2, Informative

      Grep has been ported to Windows. (And most GNU command-line tools too) Omni

    2. Re:the bad one by calculadoru · · Score: 2

      a virus that greps all your documents for each name in your address book.
      If a document contains a person's name, email it to them.


      you, sir, have a vicious dirty mind.
      hats off to you.

      --
      The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. -- G.B. Shaw
  38. As usual these useless virus alerts lack info. by zaqattack911 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How does it Normally spread?
    What windows vulnerabilities is it using?
    is it an email attachment? what is the attachement called .. or its variants??

    For christ sake...

    Love, Zaq

    1. Re:As usual these useless virus alerts lack info. by kryptkpr · · Score: 2, Informative
      --
      DJ kRYPT's Free MP3s!
  39. Why did it take this long? by rjamestaylor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Perhaps it took this long because the bad guys were busy installing keystroke recorders so that they could defeat encrypted network traffic. Also, switched networks help keep the impact of the sniffing to the infected computer -- unless the network terminates at an infected computer -- thus making this less as threat to large organization using 100% switched networks...

    --
    -- @rjamestaylor on Ello
  40. Re:Best AntiVirus? Help... by IcEMaN252 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I vote for Norton, but that's probably because its what I've used for a long time. McAfee tends to run background scans (at least in implentations I've seen) while Norton runs in the foreground. Obviously, both do realtime protection as well, but I prefer foreground virus scans that I can schedule when I'm not using my computer, like at 3:37 am.

    --
    CitrusTV (http://www.citrustv.net): the Nation's Oldest & Largest Entirely Student-Run Television Station
  41. Proper switches cannot always defeat a sniffer by thanasakis · · Score: 4, Informative
  42. Re:HACKED BY CHINESE by Cheffo+Jeffo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Um ... I THINK that was an attempt at humour ... HACKED BY CHINESE was the tagline appearing on web servers infected with Code Red ... IIRC, that is.

  43. Introducing MS Virus COM by krbvroc1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    We need a MS platform for interoperable virii. What if a machine is infected with multiple competing virii - there needs to be a middleware to arbitrate the flood requests, the MAPI calls, and the registry accesses. And what if the virii authors try to use the same registry locations to get their exploits to run at bootup.

    I think a new Virus API - VAPI32 is required. Maybe introduced into the .IOWNYOUR.NET technologies.

  44. Beating keystroke loggers by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can beat keystroke loggers by entering your password a few letters at a time in random order, using the mouse to place the cursor at the correct location in the half-finished password. I don't think there's a keystroke logger that is able to work out where you clicked in the password entry box.

    Cumbersome, but it's something I do on untrusted computers like the ones in web cafés.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    1. Re:Beating keystroke loggers by xedx · · Score: 2, Funny

      "I don't think there's a keystroke logger that is able to work out where you clicked in the password entry box."
      I'm sure keylogger/virus writers are scrambling to add that particular feature after reading your very informative comment. thanks

    2. Re:Beating keystroke loggers by anti-trojan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Once you know the characters that the password consists of, the possible combinations are very limited. You can try every combination in a few seconds.

    3. Re:Beating keystroke loggers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
      Another way is to open up a notepad.exe window or two and alternate focus between the password dialog and the notepad windows, typing a random number of characters into each window in turn. A pure keystroke logger wouldn't be able to tell which keystrokes were entered into notepad and which ones were used for your password. It can be layered on top of your method as well.

      This can be defeated by a sophisticated enough software keystroke logger that has OS level hooks, but so far very few of them are designed to handle this attack. Hardware loggers are stopped cold by this technique, since they have no way to tell the OS state.

  45. Re:Best AntiVirus? Help... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    AVG if you're cheap, or NOD32 for some dollars. Both are very low on footprint, and NOD32 has one of the best detection rates around. NOD also has one of the only interfaces that doesn't suck. *cough* kaspersky *cough*

    McAfee is slow, and Norton is equally as bad unless you get the corporate edition. Of course, most of the AV companies provide trial versions, so be sure to give a bunch of them a try (NOT all at once) and pick whichever YOU believe is the best one. :-)

  46. Request for virus writers: by daemonc · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm still waiting for a worm that installs Linux on the infected computer.

    Propogation:
    Scan random IP addresses, use multiple Windows exploits, etc. This part has been done a thousand times before, no need to reinvent the wheel.

    Payload:
    1. The worm itself
    2. Grub for Dos
    3. The contents of a network install disk

    Behavior:
    1. Upon infection, the worm will install Grub for Dos, and copy the contents of the network boot disk into c:\boot, but will not modify the boot.ini file.
    2. The worm process will run in the background, and attempt to propogate itself.
    3. At a predefined interval, the worm will pop up a window that says: "Your computer has been infected by the so-and-so worm. To install Linux and prevent this from ever happening again, click OK." (This worm should be socially responsible. We don't want to force Linux on the masses, just gently persuade them using Windows lack of security as a tool.)
    4. Continue to propogate as long as the user clicks "Cancel".
    5. When the user clicks "OK":
    5a. ping a mirror list to find the fastest mirror
    5b. write a kickstart to the boot directory to use that mirror.
    5c. modify the boot.ini file to boot Grub.
    5d. Reboot the machine, and it shall be cleansed!

    --
    All that we see or seem is but a dream within a dream.
  47. Not the first talking virus by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 3, Interesting

    nVIR on the early Macintoshes would use the Macintalk speech engine to say "Don't Panic". One source says nVIR got discovered in January 1987.

  48. Re:Request for virus writers: by st3v · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Bad Idea: A person might think they would be able to keep their old documents and programs and install Linux. After they have no idea where their documents went and how to use their "cleaned" system, the reputation of Linux would be tarnished in their eyes as a virus.

  49. The Lobotomy Virus! by Mulletproof · · Score: 3, Funny

    "How are you. I am back. My name is mister hamsi. I am seeing you. Haaaaaaaa. You must come to turkiye. I am cleaning your computer. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. 0. Gule. Gule." ("Gule. Gule" is Turkish for "Bye. Bye"

    AMAZING. The first virus that has the capacity to destroy not only the victim's computer, but his BRAIN as well. I swear, these guys need to start hiring professional comedians to do their dirty work, or we're all screwed.

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
  50. PromiscDetect by rsteele19 · · Score: 4, Informative
    The Netcraft article noted that checking to see if your network adapter is in promiscuous mode is a good way to tell if your machine has a sniffer running on it. Unfortunately, they did not mention how one can go about doing this.

    If you're using Linux, just run
    ifconfig -a
    and look for the string "PROMISC".

    If, however, you're using Windows, you need to get a utility called PromicDetect. Run it from a command prompt. If it indicates the Directed, Multicast and Broadcast filters are active, then you're probably OK.

    Source: Computerworld
    --

    This sig is umop apisdn.

  51. DEP info by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2, Informative

    From MS:

    By default, software-enforced DEP only protects limited system binaries, regardless of the hardware-enforced DEP capabilities of the processor.

    --

    I'm guessing MS runs its own software NX because it knows what memory these system binaries should and shouldnt be using. So even if it worked for DCOM/RPC it probably wouldn't work with the SQL server hole.

    Hardware DEP is a whole different story.

    Short and sweet thread on DEP here.

    Actually, you can enable software DEP for all programs. There's a button you can click on in system properties under advanced. Might be fun playing with to see if it breaks anything. Might be good to leave on if it doesnt.

  52. Organized Crime no, misguided activism yes by Oriumpor · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Perhaps organized crime could benefit from this, but in most cases electronic abuses when it comes to fraud/extortion etc seem to face a harsher penalty. I'm not too worried about criminals as much as I am a more driven and dedicated set of humanity.

    I would fear fanatics. Punishment is not necessarily even considered by a driven individual. If there was a file corruption worm on the scale of Codered/Blaster the cost could escalate from the tens of Millions to the Billions quickly. Anarchists, extremists, and environmentalists often try to destroy property to equate a cash cost for organizations for their wrongdoings.

    Heh, picture the credit agencies all exploding at the end of fight club.