Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Assessing Internet Viruses Like Human Epidemics

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the beating-the-spread dept.

underpar writes "This ComputerWorld.com article discusses the UCSD's $6.2 million attempt to study Internet viruses in a manner similar to the study of human epidemics. Stefan Savage, a computer science professor, is quoted in the article as saying, 'We'll be focused on what vectors are used, just like in assessing West Nile, to spread computer viruses and ultimately try to develop defenses to prevent them from spreading.'"

15 of 171 comments (clear)

  1. Hasn't this been done before? by wikdwarlock · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This hardly seems like a novel idea. Isn't the whole calling a computer virus a "virus" supposed to help us understand it in a biological/human way?

    --

    "I must not fear. Fear is the mind killer." -Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear
    1. Re:Hasn't this been done before? by hashish · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yeah, and this does miss some points. Viruses in humans can mutate and attach themselves to other viruses. Until a computer virus does this they eventually die out when the PC gets patched.

      But i guess it was fun for someone to do...

    2. Re:Hasn't this been done before? by Mshift2x · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes. This has been done before. We've done this in our calclulus class. We've used a program to map the 'lifecycle' of a virus. First numerous vulnerable PCs, the way in which they spread to eachother, new vulnerable computers being connected to the internet, patching of the computers. It was all pretty cool stuff.

    3. Re:Hasn't this been done before? by darkain · · Score: 5, Interesting

      polymorphic code

  2. Too easy by MuckSavage · · Score: 5, Funny

    "...just like in assessing West Nile, to spread computer viruses and ultimately try to develop defenses to prevent them from spreading.'"

    Ummm, don't use windows?

    Sorry, had to say it.

  3. Interesting Academic Exercise by tony3w · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is an interesing academic exercise, but the basic defenses that have been preached for years work just fine:

    - Avoid IE for surfing
    - Avoid OL/OE for eMail
    - Firewall (in and out) all OSes with large numbers of exploitable bugs
    - Automate patching
    - Warn on Anomolous behavior
    - Have a virus scanner that is up to date

    I don't even rely on the last one and I've been virus free for the past 9 years!

  4. Fixes by Zevets · · Score: 5, Insightful
    While this will study will explain how viruses spread, will it really tell us how to cure viruses.

    We all know how smallpox spreads. We do not know how to cure it.

    We know how viruses spread, but we only know how to remove it from a computer, not how to fix the problems of viruses.

    This study will show us where to put better virus filters, which is useful, but it will not tell us how to stop the creation of viruses and malware, which is what we really need.

    --

    Mod Wisely.

  5. STD's by Fred+Foobar · · Score: 5, Funny

    Computer virusen are actually like STD's. Windows has sex like crazy without any protection, and of course Linux doesn't have sex at all, just like its users. :)

    --
    It was a really good paper.
    1. Re:STD's by BigZaphod · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well that's easy... The Mac community is like a party at the Playboy mansion. There might be a lot of people there, but they are all of a certain higher standard and have a set of "unwritten" rules of behavior that the outsiders don't understand (hence their not being invited). So they can have lots of fun sex-play, but not so much actual sex as Windows - and yet everyone else wants in on the party under the impression that it is SAFE non-stop sex and drugs, when in reality it is non-stop stripping and lap dances while being high on caffeine pills.

      --
      Hexy - a strategy game for iPhone/iPod Touch
  6. The problem with the metaphor... by halivar · · Score: 5, Funny

    This hardly seems like a novel idea. Isn't the whole calling a computer virus a "virus" supposed to help us understand it in a biological/human way?

    I don't like likening malicious computer use to biology. If we call Sasser a "virus", then we would likewise have to call port-scanning a "forcible proctology exam".

    You don't want to know what buffer-overflow exploits would be called...

  7. Apples to Oranges by Katz_is_a_moron · · Score: 5, Funny

    If humans were susceptible to as many viruses as Windows, we would all be dead.

  8. Re:Why West Nile? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    some, based on location and lifestyle (OS) have very little chance of infection at all.

    Thus explaining why people who use Linux and people who never get laid tend to be the same people.

  9. Two words by unixbum · · Score: 5, Funny

    Natural Selection.

    If only this applied to computers :)

  10. Primary sources... by StefanSavage · · Score: 5, Informative

    FWIW, readers should always understand that when they read a news story they are getting a reporter's interpretation of an interview that itself attempts to simplify a larger story. Inevitably, this means that technical details don't survive the translation. To wit, on the second page of the proposal we write: While it is tempting to repurpose the epidemiological models of infectious disease in humans [29], Internet pathogens are in fact quite different--they are authored by intelligent adversaries. Consequently, traditional stochastic analyses are highly fragile tools for predicting the dynamics or limitations of future outbreaks. For those actually interested in what our center is planning to do, I've made the proposal and the summary available. It also gives some insight into what an NSF grant proposal looks like for those who are curious. - Stefan

  11. Difference between computers and organisms: by cr0z01d · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Organisms can die from diseases. A virus won't destroy a computer, the worst case scenario is a wipe and fresh install. This means that Microsoft can make their software bug-ridden.

    Maybe if viruses were to fry hardware, we could see some improvements.