Slashdot Mirror


Exploits Circulating for Latest Windows Holes

1sockchuck writes "Exploits are already circulating for at least two (and possibly four) of the Windows security holes addressed in Microsoft's updates on Tuesday. Several working exploits have been released for a new vulnerability in Windows Plug and Play technology, which could be used to spread a worm targeting Windows 2000 machines, according to eEye security, which has released a free scanner to help network admins identify vulnerable computers."

185 comments

  1. Microsoft Induced? by Deltaspectre · · Score: 5, Funny

    Perhaps this vulnerability was a 'Feature' to get people to migrate away from Windows 2000?

    --
    My UID is prime... is yours?
    1. Re:Microsoft Induced? by daniil · · Score: 1

      Only as much as the rest of the holes in Windows 2000 are.

      --
      Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
    2. Re:Microsoft Induced? by randm.ca · · Score: 1
      My UID is prime... is yours?
      As a matter of fact, yes.
      On the quest to ban Dihydrogen Monoxide
      I'm going to assume, based solely on the evil sounding name of this substance, that it is deadly. So can I make a donation anywhere to help the cause?
    3. Re:Microsoft Induced? by Deltaspectre · · Score: 0

      Donations can be made of space in your bank account to the next Nigerian fellow that happens to email you :)

      --
      My UID is prime... is yours?
    4. Re:Microsoft Induced? by agraupe · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if you get the joke or not, but Dihydrogen Monoxide is, in fact, water.

    5. Re:Microsoft Induced? by joepeg · · Score: 1

      Nah,

      They are just going to kick all Windows 2000 users to the curb on June 30, 2005 whether you come with them to XP/Longhorn, or not.

      --

      ZEN is a prime number in base-36

    6. Re:Microsoft Induced? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      June 30, 2005 < August 12, 2005

      "Going to" does not compute.

    7. Re:Microsoft Induced? by randm.ca · · Score: 1

      I don't care what it is. Have you read this? We gotta ban this stuff, and fast!

    8. Re:Microsoft Induced? by ZorinLynx · · Score: 1

      Fedora Core CDs: $0.00
      Software license to install them: $0.00
      Just giggling when folks complain about their 0wn3d Windows boxes: Priceless.

      The better things in life are free. For everything else, there's Microsoft.

    9. Re:Microsoft Induced? by RKloti · · Score: 1
      Perhaps this vulnerability was a 'Feature' to get people to migrate away from Windows 2000?
      Considering the fact that Microsoft has already released a patch for the hole, that would seem highly unlikely. As the old saying goes, never attribute to malice what can be better explained by incompetence, and that is evidently in no short supply at Redmond, given that the security hole managed to survive unnoticed for several years. Who knows what other security holes lurk deep in the Windows NT 5.x source code? Perhaps there is a buffer overflow somewhere in the TCP/IP stack... that would cetainly be interesting. Or better yet, a buffer overflow in the XP SP2 firewall...
    10. Re:Microsoft Induced? by FragHARD · · Score: 1

      This is a great site! very informative. That is the last Itime I youch this stuff!

      --
      FragHARD or don't frag at all
    11. Re:Microsoft Induced? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The monopoly prefers the 'up yours edition' over Win2000, which lacks anti-consumer 'phone home' function.

    12. Re:Microsoft Induced? by rooster9 · · Score: 1

      is this agraupe really that stupid? Maybe you he needs a can of ID-10T to loosen up a little.

    13. Re:Microsoft Induced? by confused.brit · · Score: 1

      ok... allow me to translate that for you, so you can get grandparents joke h20 S/he is on a quest to ban water >

      --
      Sigs are for wimps
    14. Re:Microsoft Induced? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is it that people can recognize the absurdity of banning water, and see that it is a joke, yet they can't recognize the absurdity in the statement "I'm going to assume, based solely on the evil sounding name of this substance, that it is deadly."? Even I can see he was carrying on the joke, and I'm just an AC!

    15. Re:Microsoft Induced? by agraupe · · Score: 1

      What? I don't get it... Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) is definitely water, although I have no idea what ID-10T is.

    16. Re:Microsoft Induced? by rooster9 · · Score: 1

      ok. go ask a friend.

  2. Only two or four... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Funny

    At least, Microsoft is maintaining great quality control.

  3. Is it really New? by ellem · · Score: 4, Funny

    I mean W2K has been around for about... uh, 5 years?

    So isn't this just an old exploit that was just found?

    See? Having 900,000,000,000 lines of code is a good thing.

    --
    This .sig is fake but accurate.
    1. Re:Is it really New? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair to M$, there isn't much they can do more than releasing a patch. Patches will always get quickly reverse engineered and exploits developed, but their Automatic update mechanism in XP SP2 is the best you can hope for amongst the uneducated masses.

      What really annoys me is that they actually leave vulns unpatched for months. See eeye:
      http://www.eeye.com/html/research/upcoming/index.h tml, there are unpatched IE holes more than 4 months old!

    2. Re:Is it really New? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So isn't this just an old exploit that was just found?

      No. This is an old vulnerability that was just published, and had new exploits written and published for it. That is not to say other exploits have not existed for this vulnerability for the last five years.

    3. Re:Is it really New? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe Microsoft is just trying to prove they can out do FireFox. After all, Mozilla kept the critical shared function objects code execution exploit a secret for 2 months before patching it, and left the content-generated event exploit (which they rated as a "high" security risk) open for 3 months.

      And with each version we get even older vulnerabilities being admitted for the first time (the 1.0.5 release fixed a high risk exploit that was reported before 1.0.3 was released, and had 3 more exploits that where known before 1.0.4) so Microsoft obviously has no choice but to go big if they want to remain competitive with FireFox's growing list of unpatched vulnerabilities.

    4. Re:Is it really New? by dagr8tim · · Score: 2, Funny
      I mean W2K has been around for about... uh, 5 years? So isn't this just an old exploit that was just found?

      This just goes to prove that hackers are getting as lazy. I mean it took them 5 years to find this hidden feature. Or maybe MS programmers have more forsight than we give them credit for.

      --
      "Does your computer have IP on it?"
    5. Re:Is it really New? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1
      This is an old vulnerability that was just published, and had new exploits written and published for it.

      Just to amplify what you've said:
      This is an old vulnerability that was just published publically, and had new exploits written and published for it.
      It's possible, and has a certain chance of being likely that this exploit has been published in non-public fora for the past five years.

      As we learned a couple stories back, Microsoft is catching exploits of unpublished vulnerabilities in their honeypots. I'm rather surprised they're making it public - to rephrase it: "Yes, we have 0-day exploits." Warms the heart, doesn't it?
      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    6. Re:Is it really New? by RabidOverYou · · Score: 1

      > It's possible, and has a certain chance of being likely ...

      Well gosh, there's an authoritative statement.

    7. Re:Is it really New? by edxwelch · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't be surprised if black hats are finding new security holes and secretly passing on the information to others.. but do you actually have any source to backup these claims, or is it just speculation?

    8. Re:Is it really New? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Don't care much for probability, do you?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    9. Re:Is it really New? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Well, Microsoft's HoneyMonkeys has proven that there are zero-day exploits being spread around.

      The "virus underground" is known to exist as a subculture that shares information about building viruses and kits.

      There are plenty of cracks sites available, some of which take advantage of buffer overflows.

      And there are plenty of phrack/2600/gfiles sites out there, plus all the IRC babble around them.

      We know there are 'teams' of 'sploit writers who compete with each other (and often target and dismantle other teams' wares), so they're at least sharing information within the teams.

      Let's just say it would be shocking if a vulnerability was never disseminated below the radar, but you can't prove the negative.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    10. Re:Is it really New? by daeley · · Score: 1

      Don't care much for probability, do you?

      Yes and no...

      --
      I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
    11. Re:Is it really New? by FragHARD · · Score: 1

      They are out-doing firefox alright-- in fact they take the whole OS and put bugs (features) in to it instead of just on little (well sort of) web browser program.

      --
      FragHARD or don't frag at all
    12. Re:Is it really New? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love how "you people" make assumptions and form opinions without actually reading up on the subject and educating yourselves. No wonder security is in the state it is today -- when even the geeks don't have a clue.

      This is a new vulnerability in a service that had a vulnerability years ago. So yes, many years ago there was a UPnP vulnerability. But this is not the same one.

      Simply go to either Microsoft.Com or hell even eEye.Com and you can easily read and learn the difference.

    13. Re:Is it really New? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      I love how "you people" make assumptions and form opinions without actually reading up on the subject and educating yourselves.

      I love how people lambast others for their ignorance while demonstrating they don't even know what the terms being used mean.

      This is a new vulnerability in a service that had a vulnerability years ago.

      So you're saying that If I install Win2k from my old CD on a system and don't install the patches, I won't be vulnerable to this exploit? If so, you're wrong. This vulnerability has existed for a long time, but was only recently published in mainstream security news.

      For future reference:

      Vulnerability - a security hole.

      Exploit - code to take advantage of that security hole.

      The point I made, and the person replying to my post made was that it is entirely likely that some people knew about this hole before it was patched and published (actually it is a certainty since someone found it in order for it to be fixed). It is also possible that this hole has been maliciously exploited in the past. This vulnerability has existed for years.

  4. Registration form privacy information at eEye by mikeophile · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Our website's registration forms require users to provide contact information (names and email addresses) and financial information (account or credit card numbers). Financial information that is collected is used to bill the user for products and services purchased and is only used internally by eEye. Contact information is used to confirm and ship orders, to contact the user when necessary, and to notify users when new products and services are available. Users may choose not to receive future mailings from eEye; see the Choice/Opt-Out section below. eEye Digital Security may occasionally share visitor contact information with official product resellers that adhere to a comparable privacy policy; visitor contact information is NEVER given to other third-party vendors that are not affiliated with eEye.

    Why do they insist on my personal information if they aren't going to use it?

    They have the ability to let me opt out of of mailing, why don't they provide an opt out for my information in the first place?

    1. Re:Registration form privacy information at eEye by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Notice they only say "NEVER given to other third-party vendors that are not affiliated with eEye."

      which means if they are actually affiliated with companies that do naughty things you're screwed... I wonder if they give a full list of affiliates or if thats "private" comopany information.

      loopholes as usual.

    2. Re:Registration form privacy information at eEye by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    3. Re:Registration form privacy information at eEye by deviantphil · · Score: 1

      Our website's registration forms require users to provide contact information (names and email addresses) and financial information (account or credit card numbers). Financial information that is collected is used to bill the user for products and services purchased and is only used internally by eEye. Contact information is used to confirm and ship orders, to contact the user when necessary, and to notify users when new products and services are available. Users may choose not to receive future mailings from eEye; see the Choice/Opt-Out section below. eEye Digital Security may occasionally share visitor contact information with official product resellers that adhere to a comparable privacy policy; visitor contact information is NEVER given to other third-party vendors that are not affiliated with eEye.

      Or...you could just not give them a valid email address? Or...if they need to send you something (registration code....whatever) via email you can do this:

      1. Buy Domain for $8
      2. Make bogus alias that points to your real email address
      3. Register for whatever (with bogus alias)
      4. Get required email
      5. Delete Alias
    4. Re:Registration form privacy information at eEye by JFitzsimmons · · Score: 1

      Too much work. Try this:

      http://www.spamgourmet.com/

      --
      Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -Anonymous
    5. Re:Registration form privacy information at eEye by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 1

      What does the word affiliated mean in this context?

      The privacy information says tat the information is never given to other thrid-party. It doesn't say that the the information cannot be sold.

      --
      If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
    6. Re:Registration form privacy information at eEye by TravelGirl · · Score: 1

      i'm surprised you're surprised that marketing weasels lie.

      just lie. use a free email. name yourself john dillinger: he's in banking. al capone: he's in insurance. etc...

      make their "information" less useful

  5. It is interesting that... by donleyp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The exploits came out after the announcement and not before. It begs the question, do we need to give M$ credit for pushing the patch before the exploit became common knowledge? Compare this to Cisco who tried to squash recent publicizing of their vulnerability.

    --
    You got any karma man? I really neeed it. Just a little hit! Come on!
    1. Re:It is interesting that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It begs the question

      It raises the question. Begging the question means something completely different.

    2. Re:It is interesting that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could be wrong, but isn't that typical of what's been happening for the last couple of years?

      It seems that most of the recent viruses and other malicious software attacking Windows have come out AFTER patches for those vulnerabilities are provided by Microsoft. I guess virus writers are relying more on reverse-engineering patches than on finding vulnerabilities themselves...of course, whatever credit Microsoft does or does not deserve for their patching policies, if the holes weren't there to begin with, there wouldn't be these problems...

    3. Re:It is interesting that... by Tengoo · · Score: 1
      It begs the question, do we need to give M$ credit for pushing the patch before the exploit became common knowledge?


      Uh oh, the grammar nazis will decend upon ye shortly. I heard that phrase misused on CNN the other day, how the hell does that happen.
    4. Re:It is interesting that... by uqbar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Cisco had also patched their vulnerability before the publicity. The whole point of the BlackHat presentation was to encourage admins to use the patch, and to shame Cisco for underplaying how serious the issue is.

    5. Re:It is interesting that... by Le+Marteau · · Score: 1

      It raises the question. Begging the question means something completely different.

      Not any more, Poindexter. The definition has changed. Languages have a tendency to do that, just as pedants have a tendency to want to see their language cast in stone.

      --
      Mod down people who tell people how to mod in their sigs
    6. Re:It is interesting that... by timster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem is that now it means both things, and every time you encounter it you have to reason out which meaning is being used. So it's currently better to not use the expression at all, and substitute "raises the question" for one meaning and "circular logic" for the other.

      Evolution of language isn't a problem, but useless entropy like forgetting the meaning of an expression makes clear and effective writing more difficult. There are those of us who like to read clear and effective writing, so we wish that it were easier to do.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    7. Re:It is interesting that... by Le+Marteau · · Score: 1

      I hear you, and certainly commiserate.

      I have personally resigned the phrase 'begs the question' to the trash heap of vulgar language, and unless I'm talking to a man of letters and not the general public, I don't use the phrase. It's 'more proper' usage is all but useless in the 'real world' .

      It's too bad, but such is life and language. The vulgar consistantly take words with precise and definate meanings and sully them. I guess what I'm saying is that to try to fight that kind of degredation is an exercise in futility and never ending frustration, and is best avoided.

      --
      Mod down people who tell people how to mod in their sigs
    8. Re:It is interesting that... by operagost · · Score: 1
      It's 'more proper' usage is all but useless in the 'real world' .
      You are correct. Unfortunately, you used the wrong "its."

      D'oh!

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    9. Re:It is interesting that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree.

      Of course, the phrase "I agree" means "I think you're an idiot" according to my personal definition.

      Just because some people are confused about what a phrase means, it doesn't mean we should throw away the existing definition and start using theirs. Otherwise everything Microsoft does is innovative.

    10. Re:It is interesting that... by fbjon · · Score: 1

      I've been trying to find an explanation for the original meaning, but haven't found one that makes logical sense (I'm not a native speaker). Any pointers? I can understand circular logic, but my brain cannot twist that from the phrase "beg the question"...

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    11. Re:It is interesting that... by deesine · · Score: 0


      LOL

      Major crash'n burn...after pulling off a couple loops and rolls.

      --
      damaged by dogma
    12. Re:It is interesting that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      From http://begthequestion.info/ --

      'The phrase "begging the question", or "petitio principii" in Latin, refers to the "question" in a formal debate -- that is, the issue being debated. In such a debate, one side may ask the other side to concede certain points in order to speed up the proceedings. To "beg" the question is to ask that the very point at issue be conceded, which is of course illegitimate.'

    13. Re:It is interesting that... by Changa_MC · · Score: 2, Funny

      To beg a question is to ask a question to answer itself. (Please, please, question, give me your answer!)

      Like a little kid saying, "Do you like this, say yes?"
      Begging, so that you'll know what you're supposed to say.

      --
      Changa hates change.
    14. Re:It is interesting that... by I'm+Don+Giovanni · · Score: 0

      This is the way that exploits are normally made nowadays. The hackers wait for security updates to be released, examine the updates to determine what holes they fixed, then create exloits targetting those holes, hoping to get at the machines that haven't yet applied the update.

      It's been this way for years. The three *major* worms/viruses that were released in 2000-2003 (Sasser, Blaster, and the other whose name I forget) were all released after the corresponsing patches had been released (sometimes *months* after). Only machines that hadn't been updated were compromised, but it was common a few years ago for IT departments in businesses (much more so than home machines) to be slow to apply updates, much more so that today.

      (IT depts now usually take updates quickly because Microsoft went to the monthly update release schedule, allowing IT depts can plan accordingly. In the past there was no regular release schedule, so IT depts couldn't plan for updates and as a result many times simply didn't apply updates at all.)

      --
      -- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
    15. Re:It is interesting that... by Sheepdot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I haven't the faintest clue why your comment is insightful.

      Let me give you some examples of exploits (ie worms) that came out after patches: Blaster, Sasser, Nimda (MS patched this 330 days before the worm actually hit). Code Red is the only one that immediately comes to mind as a worm that hit before the patch, and even in that case, MS didn't know ahead of time that IIS was exploitable. It was 0-day.

      In the case of the Plug & Play exploit, it became common knowledge *because* of the patch, which was reversed engineered to see what it fixed.

      In the case of the other item, Microsoft acknowledged earlier that spyware companies were already exploiting the java proxy dll 0-day and thus created the patch.

      In the first case the patch made the exploit common knowledge, in the second, the common knowledge came before the patch. So the answer to your question is: no.

      Don't get me wrong, MS is getting better about patching, and they should be commended for their efforts in finding the java proxy IE exploit "in the wild" on their own without a security company having to release anything, but they don't need to be commended for releasing their regular monthly patches.

      Patching for security issues is not something that a vendor is rewarded for. They are expected to do it.

    16. Re:It is interesting that... by timster · · Score: 1

      I don't know how it happens, but when I heard the phrase misused on NPR's "All Things Considered", I officially gave up.

      By the way, it's spelled "descend". Also, your second sentence is a comma splice; in this case your comma could be replaced with a semicolon or a period. You also need a question mark after "how the hell does that happen", not a period.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    17. Re:It is interesting that... by timbrown · · Score: 1

      No, the point of the Blackhat presentation was to tell the world that the watchdog could be fooled and that an enabled shell was possible. The specifics of the exploit presented were not the news story. Lynn's work defeats one of Cisco's much vaunted security mechanisms. Any Cisco exploit would have done.

      --
      Tim Brown
    18. Re:It is interesting that... by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      "It raises the question. Begging the question means something completely different."

      Not any more, Poindexter. The definition has changed. Languages have a tendency to do that

      I suppose that you think "nukular" is now part of the language as well. Incorrect usage of debating terms merely marks you as someone who never learned about logic, and can't be bothered to pay attention to those who did. Try "invites" or "raises" next time.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
  6. I don't know exactly why... by Stanistani · · Score: 2, Funny

    But I'm reminded of a childhood verse...
    "The worms crawl in, the worms crawl out
    The worms play pinochle on your snout..."

    1. Re:I don't know exactly why... by Fishstick · · Score: 2

      Lovely little nursery rhyme, that
      Did you ever think, as a hearse goes by,
      That you might be the next to die?
      They wrap you up in a big white sheet,
      And bury you down about six feet deep

      They put you in a big black box,
      And cover you up with dirt and rocks,
      And all goes well, for about a week,
      And then the coffin begins to leak!

      The worms crawl in, the worms crawl out,
      The worms play pinochle on your snout.
      They eat your eyes, they eat your nose,
      They eat the jelly between your toes.

      A great big worm with rolling eyes,
      Crawls in your stomach and out your eyes,
      Your stomach turns a slimy green,
      And pus pours out like whipping cream.

      You spread it on a slice of bread,
      And that's what worms eat when you're dead.

      Alternate / Additional Lines:

      They wrap you up in a long white shirt
      And cover you up with rocks and dirt

      They put you in a long pine box
      And cover you over with dirt and rocks

      The worms that crawl in are lean and thin
      The worms that crawl out are fat and stout

      Your eyes fall in and your hair falls out
      Your brains come pouring out your snout

      They use your bones as telephones
      and call you up but you're no longer at home

      Your eyes pop out, your teeth decay
      and that's the end of a peaceful day

      You turn the color of sickening green
      And pus comes out like butter and cream
      You wipe it up with a piece of bread
      And that's what you eat when you are dead

      They eat your eyes, they eat your nose
      They eat the jelly between your toes

      Your stomach turns a mossy green
      And pus comes out like fresh whipped cream
      You wipe it up with a piece of bread
      And that's what you eat when you are dead

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    2. Re:I don't know exactly why... by wolf- · · Score: 1

      http://inky.50megs.com/idlechild/songs/theworms.ht m

      Many more cool and disgusting verses to parents song.

      --
      ----- LoboSoft specializes in Digital Language Lab
  7. Free, but not without pain by bitslinger_42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is anyone but me getting sick of these companies releasing "free" tools that require you to register for their incessant spam, phone calls, and other marketing harassment in order to download? Yes, I understand that they spent money to develop the tool, but what if I want to scan my home network? MySQL isn't too bad, at least. They have the marketing signup, should you be interested, but provide a link to download without all the crap.

    [Wanders off muttering about the good old days of gopher and archie]
    1. Re:Free, but not without pain by zxnos · · Score: 1

      yup. but if you look hard there is sometimes a small line of text that says "click here to download without registering". at least autodesk has one. it is hard to see though.

      --
      always mosh clockwise
    2. Re:Free, but not without pain by uqbar · · Score: 1

      It's even worse when you pay for the tool and you still get spam, spyware and worse...

    3. Re:Free, but not without pain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yes, I understand that they spent money to develop the tool, but what if I want to scan my home network?

      then write your own damn tool.

    4. Re:Free, but not without pain by xtracto · · Score: 1
      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    5. Re:Free, but not without pain by shmlco · · Score: 1

      Thanks! Another domain to add to our "automatically deny access" list...

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    6. Re:Free, but not without pain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These web sites protect us from spam, if you run a site that insists on users giving email addresses to register, you should accept the email address no matter what it is. Sure have the user validate by clicking on a link in an email, but allow those of us that don't want spam to use services like these.

      By rejecting these domains, you are just as bad as the spammers, and on behalf of the /. community, you aren't welcome here. Fuck off.

      Posted anon for reasons that should be obvious.

  8. Not to worry... by pmdata · · Score: 1

    Exploits ike these will all be fixed in Longhorn, umm, Vista. Seriously, the general population doesn't patch the security fixes that are out there, let alone the new ones that come out every other Tuesday. So exploits based on new patches are irrelevant if a computer can be compromised with mydoom.

    1. Re:Not to worry... by guildsolutions · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Microsoft with all its massive billions of dollars, charging in excess of $300 for a full, licesned version of Windows XP Proffessional... Cannot afford to write clean, bug free code?

      As a programer myself I am often faced with the idea of completely re-writing my code, not just leaving the function sit, while being unused.

      Compare to Apple's OS X (granted, the numbers argument about there is not a mass majority to spread a major virus even if it was to be discovered), why cant Microsoft decide to take shape, and start producing a REAL operating system that is built upon firm solid foundations of bug free (realitivly) code. They have admited in the past that they have pushed features ahead of security, and yet our major corporations still tout that microsoft is secure enough for there senstive finiancial information.

      Give me a break will ya? I really just wish that microsoft would have a much more open beta, much more strict adherance to quality code, and less mouthpeices saying how great there stuff is.

    2. Re:Not to worry... by pmdata · · Score: 1

      I'm affraid that you are wishing for something that's never going to happen. Here's to the OS X revolution! pm

    3. Re:Not to worry... by whoever57 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think that you have to assume there will be bugs in the code. I am sure Apple has bugs. The real question, is: why are there so many listening ports on a Windows NT/2K/XP machine? Even one that has no files shared for users. What does it need them for? MS recommends running a firewall, which rather defeats the purpose of any listening ports, including such things as the administrative shares. In this case, we have some code that is supposed to detect new hardware apparently listening on the Ethernet port. Why? New hardware is going to fly down the network? Wow! MS should patent that now since it would put UPS and Fedex out of business. So, I don't think it is so much a bug as "what in $DEITY's name were they thinking when they designed this feature?"

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    4. Re:Not to worry... by Achoi77 · · Score: 1
      I wish there was a direct correlation between "Making more money" and "Quality Products." Let's face it: Microsoft is the McDonalds of the Operating System world. They aren't interested in giving you the best thing on earth, they are interested in supplying you with barest essential needs to sustain you, in order to maximize their profit without sacrificing their customer demand and quarterly profits.

      Don't misunderstand me, I'm not trying to bash Microsoft. Overall I beleive their product fills the need of the majority of their customers in terms of productivity. And yes, there are other Operating Systems out there that are much better suited for different or more specialized needs.

      But if all you are looking for is a cheap burger and a soda to prevent you from, well - starving, then you can bet your job that most people are not going to go to DB Bistro Moderne to get a $50 Foie Gras burger when the McDonalds down the street will fulfill that need perfectly,more cost effectively, and quicker.

      People that actively search for a better alternative solution will always luck out. To these guys, the cheap burgers they find are the Carl's Jr, or the In-N-Out Burgers: higher quality burgers for the same amount of cost and convenience (YMMV, but you get the gist of what I'm trying to say). But the majority of the world doesn't really care. To them, a burger is a burger is a burger is a burger. All they care is:
      1) Can I get on the internet to buy stuff?
      2) Can I chat with my friends?
      3) Can I take photos and print them from my computer?
      4) Can I write documents or other work related material?
      5) Can I listen to music with it? 6) Does it *just work?* (I really hate that term)

      In fact, it's only a recent trend that we are starting to see quality coming up from the woodwork. As more Wendys are popping up, McDonalds is forced to up their quality standards in order to keep customer satisfaction (again, whether or not you beleive Wendys has higher quality products is irrelevant). It's the capitalistic way. Microsoft doesn't want to enforce a level of quality if it's going to cause them to lose money, unless they need to. And they are starting to need to.

    5. Re:Not to worry... by Corngood · · Score: 1

      If you plug in a UPNP video playback device, yes, it _is_ going to fly down your network. Stuff like that isn't done for no reason at all (not to say it shouldn't be secure).

    6. Re:Not to worry... by whoever57 · · Score: 1
      If you plug in a UPNP video playback device

      Maybe it is there, but I did not see any reference to UPnP, only PnP.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  9. Let the MS Bashing begin! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean, how DARE they release a fix for a security hole BEFORE it's exploited.

    Tom

  10. Why is this surprising? by SkiifGeek · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The recent article on the front page here (2 down at the moment), talks about vulnerabilities linked to MS05-038 being in the wild in mid July (actually quite a bit earlier, but we will give them the benefit of the doubt). There have been a number of minor exploits in existence for at least a month and a half with respect to some image handling capabilities through IE (also MS05-038).

    Security-Protocols claimed to have discovered the vulnerability linked to MS05-041, and there were some minor claims that other people had been able to make it into exploits which weren't widespread.

    I initially thought that the Plug and Play vulnerability was linked to a report on an overflow with respect to handling USB devices (which has also been reported), but it seems to be much worse.

    I am fully aware of the reasons why companies EOL their software, but Microsoft's cessation of mainstream support for Win 2000 might be coming back to bite them, given that Win 2000 is just as vulnerable to these exploits as Win XP and 2003, if not more so.

    1. Re:Why is this surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am fully aware of the reasons why companies EOL their software, but Microsoft's cessation of mainstream support for Win 2000 might be coming back to bite them, given that Win 2000 is just as vulnerable to these exploits as Win XP and 2003, if not more so.

      You know that Microsoft will still provide security fixes for win2000 for 5 more years, right?

      Numbnuts.

    2. Re:Why is this surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First of all.

      The PnP issue is MS05-039. It is an issue with the RPC interface of the PnP service

      As for Security-Protocols / Tom Ferris / b4dp4ck3t that moron couldn't find a vulnerability if it punched him in the face.

  11. Ofcourse..this is NAN by iyerns · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Ofcourse... This is NAN (Not A News). You can always expect this with MS !

  12. Aren't they always critical? by TheOtherAgentM · · Score: 1

    I think once in the past three years I've seen on month without an update that was critical. Also, the way I've seen it, is that you have three to six months before the vulnerabilities are widely attacked. There are always people that are quicker on the ball, but three to six months is a good range before every other website is taking advantage of thtese vulnerabilities from what I've seen.

  13. Everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...is OK in here, Bob!* (heard from a little voice in my Mac).

    * Remember that .com ad with a fish talking to its owner?

  14. Unless I'm mis-reading this... by goldspider · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...Microsoft patched the holes BEFORE the exploits started circulating?

    If that's the case, what's the problem?

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    1. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by pete6677 · · Score: 1

      The millions of users who don't patch are the problem. Sometimes these exploits turn their computers into zombies that send spam or spread viruses, making them other peoples' problems as well.

    2. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One word: Slammer.

    3. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by afree87 · · Score: 1

      Not everyone auto-updates and reboots right when the patch comes out. Some people might even ignore the Windows Update icon for weeks at a time, or tell it to stop bothering them.

    4. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by crlove · · Score: 1

      The problem is that most people don't patch their systems.

      Seems to me Microsoft almost always has a patch before the exploits go around.

      I keep my system updated and turn on the firewall in XP, and I've never had a security issue with my machine.

    5. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by crlove · · Score: 1

      Well color me Redundant. Apparently I'm a slow typer.

    6. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by RPoet · · Score: 1

      The problem is that most people don't patch their systems.

      These days, people run expensive (in both monetarily and computationally senses) "virus" scanners instead of updating their systems. Ideally, if you have an up-to-date system, there are no holes for worms to exploit, so you don't need worm protection. Right?

      --
      "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
    7. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by crlove · · Score: 1
      if you have an up-to-date system...you don't need worm protection

      Well, I'm sure some would argue that. But it's always been my philosophy, and it's always worked for me.

    8. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by Espectr0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Simple. It is known that exploits are made after MS releases the patch, by reverse engineering them. Since 90% of the people is stupid and don't patch their systems (i made this up) then these people get hit.

      My rant is not against MS. It's against people (supposedly people with knowledge) don't take the time to update their systems. SP2 actually improved this by trying to push the updates in the user's throats.

    9. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      My rant is not against MS. It's against people (supposedly people with knowledge) don't take the time to update their systems.

      Until recently, they haven't really had to. They should have, but the zombie nets are relatively recent developments.

      I wonder how many people burned out their Model T engines because they didn't understand they had to change the oil.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    10. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by dreamer-of-rules · · Score: 1

      It's very easy to ignore. Just a tiny blue ball at the very bottom right.. and is auto-hidden half the time. It's taken months to train my coworkers how to check for updates.

      Apple actually opens a window *gasp* and gets in your face about updating. That, and that most Mac users I know trust Apple updates (except for iTunes updates, which "always" tighten DRM).

      --
      Everyone is entitled to his own opinions, but not his own facts.
    11. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by jahudabudy · · Score: 1

      My rant is not against MS. It's against people (supposedly people with knowledge) don't take the time to update their systems.

      I'm sure that a large # of non-updaters are simply not updating thru laziness, or lack of knowledge. However, Microsoft has to get some of the blame here. You can't download updates/patches in any browser other than IE, which my mom doesn't know how to access, now that I "replaced" it with FF on her machine (yes, I know it is still there, but she doesn't, and I don't want to tell her). In order to download updates, you have to install the Genuine Advantage tool, which explicitly states that once installed, cannot be removed, which throws a red-flag for me (what if it breaks something critical?) If you go the automatic route, Microsoft so conveniently clutters your machine with updates and patches that you don't want/need.
      I'm not saying that people shouldn't update their systems, and Microsoft has done a good job of "pushing updates in the users' throats" w/ SP2. I guess my point is that I wouldn't be surprised if sometimes, it is in fact the people with a little* knowledge that hesitate to update their systems.

      * Enough to be wary of MS, but not enough to run a different OS ;-)

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
    12. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      and I've never had a security issue with my machine.

      ...that you know of. ;-)


      And, it's not Microsoft's problem that people don't update their systems (at least, not technically. I do realize, they still receive much of the blame.)
    13. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by mooglez · · Score: 1

      So, in effect, you are saying that you are the fault?

    14. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by SailorFrag · · Score: 1

      ...but the zombie nets are relatively recent developments.

      How long ago do you consider recent? Zombie nets have been becoming increasingly problematic for at least the past 4 years... and that's just when I started being affected by them. At least it's slightly more difficult to infect machines now... in the good 'ol days, the zombie nets mostly spread by looking for win2k machines with a blank administrator password and open c$ share.

    15. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by jahudabudy · · Score: 1

      Nah, I run Suse at home, I set my mom's machine to automatic update (she just uses Outlook and FireFox, so there isn't too much updates are going to break). My work machine I update manually once a week, which is from where I know the details of updating a'la Microsoft. I'm just saying I can understand where some people might be overly suspicious/understandably reluctant to jump through the hoops MS has placed in the way of updating.

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
    16. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      How long ago do you consider recent? Zombie nets have been becoming increasingly problematic for at least the past 4 years...

      Yeah, that's about right. It's a long time in the computer security field, but we're talking about something that needs to have an effect on societal behavior. From that perspective, 4 years is pretty short for something that, on the surface, risks neither life nor limb.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    17. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agrees , 90 percents of the peoples is stupid uh huh sir .
      If your going to insult a large number of people , please make sure your not guilty of making your own slip ups .

      Now that is a simple error and does not make you stupid , your obviously not someone who works in the field of languages , So why insinuate that people who do not work in the IT field are stupid for improper use of a computer.

    18. Re:Unless I'm mis-reading this... by vhogemann · · Score: 1

      The problem are the thousands of unpatched systems out there that will get infected.

      --
      ---- You know how some doctors have the Messiah complex - they need to save the world? You've got the "Rubik's" complex
  15. Begin the Slashdot chant... by bigtallmofo · · Score: 0, Troll

    Microsoft is disappointed that certain security researchers have breached the commonly accepted industry practice of withholding vulnerability data so close to update release and have published exploit code

    I can already hear the Slashdot chant of how security researchers have every right to release exploit code usable by script-kiddies whenever they want. I can't wait until the Internet culture is such that just because you can do something doesn't make it right.

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
    1. Re:Begin the Slashdot chant... by spot35 · · Score: 1

      not entirely sure why this is a troll.

      I can take a gun and shoot someone now just because someone made a gund available to me, but that doesn't make it right. I can release an exploit to software to disrupt many peoples lives because someone told me how to do it, but that doesn't make it right.

      Just because it's on t'interweb doesn't change the rules of morality and ethics, right and wrong.

    2. Re:Begin the Slashdot chant... by ggzeama · · Score: 0

      Back in old days, it was like that. Since commercial companies stormed in, the culture has changed: it has become the common culture (=avg(all the people that are using it)); the equation was the same, but since only *.edu people had access ...

    3. Re:Begin the Slashdot chant... by Lifewish · · Score: 1

      They do have every right, legally speaking. It's not a feature of Slashdot or internet culture, it's a feature of the American style of government. Ethically speaking, most security researchers disclose responsibly anyway - they give the company a month or so to fix the problem before telling the world. I, and probably most slashdotters, would agree that telling world+wife before the company producing the software has had a fair bash at the problem is a little off, if only because a lot of us know what it's like to be in the company's position.

      In fact, it's essential to have a healthy population of security researchers finding flaws and (eventually) making them public, because it stops companies sitting on their arses for months or otherwise playing silly buggers

      --
      For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
    4. Re:Begin the Slashdot chant... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay genius, let's say everybody follows this "industry practice". What incentive is there for Microsoft to ever create secure products? That's right, none. They just put out their crap and hope that a "good sam" will do their audits for them.

      All those "responsible" researchers are just doing free work for Microsoft. How does that feel, doing what a big multi-billion dollar company tells you and not even getting paid for it?

      This "industry practice" is utter bullshit. I agree with DJB: full description of vulnerability, with working exploit, for every bug you find, otherwise, keep it to yourself and protect your own systems. Don't do Microsoft any favors.

      Remember, the goal is not responsible disclosure or rapid patching. The goal is software that's *shipped* secure. Market forces will take care of this, if we drop this "responsible disclosure" nonsense and let researchers (whether they work in a university, an IT department, or their mom's basement) say what they feel like.

  16. no Windows for me anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been a devote Windows user for many years but I am so fed up with patching Microsoft's crappy code and having to run several antivirus and antispyware programs at any given time. Instead of hiring more developers Microsoft is using us as unpaid guinea pigs to chase bugs and exposing us to script kiddies breaking into our machines. This is an endless rat race. At the same time they are hyping Windows security with sponsored "independent" studies and trashing Linux with brewed up FUD. I am sick and tired of this bullshit. I've backed up my data and I am burning my first Linux install disk. If I like it I'll be using Linux from now on.

  17. Well give and take credit from Microsoft by binderhead126 · · Score: 0

    On one hand, things like this are very serious, and at least they are fixing the issue. The problem is that while many business continue to use Win2K, Microsoft in my opinion, has shifted its focus to WinXP or 2003, Yet critical fixes are still needed for 2K. Personally, the software curse is in effect here, once you produce something, you have to support it forever. Microsoft has a nice history of dumping products, or "ending support" as they call it.

    1. Re:Well give and take credit from Microsoft by toddbu · · Score: 2, Insightful
      It's exactly this kind of argument that people need to make to their bosses when talking about using open source software. Your company should decide when the life of a piece of software is over, and they can make this decision on factors like "Do I want to patch this or install a new version?" And because some vulernable software like IIS is built right in, you can't just upgrade that one piece if the vendor decides they'll no longer fix it for your platform.

      Microsoft's biggest problem really is all this integration that they do when it doesn't need to be done. Yes, it's nice that I can click on a link in an email and open a document in my browser. That's a good use of integration. But when much of the system depends on a couple of dlls that can't be upgraded without changing the whole system then that's not good at all. I think that there's a huge appeal to the F/OSS model and decoupling of software when it comes to this kind of thing.

      --
      If you don't want crime to pay, let the government run it.
    2. Re:Well give and take credit from Microsoft by pointbeing · · Score: 1
      On one hand, things like this are very serious, and at least they are fixing the issue. The problem is that while many business continue to use Win2K, Microsoft in my opinion, has shifted its focus to WinXP or 2003, Yet critical fixes are still needed for 2K. Personally, the software curse is in effect here, once you produce something, you have to support it forever. Microsoft has a nice history of dumping products, or "ending support" as they call it.

      I believe MS is discontinuing patch support for Win2k on March 31, 2010. MS is in business to make a profit, not to cater to more altruistic motives. Windows NT 4.0 patch support lasted for *eight* years.

      So - what other software company is still patching eight-year old OS? Sun? IBM? SCO? Novell? Apple?

      --
      we see things not as as they are, but as we are.
      -- anais nin
    3. Re:Well give and take credit from Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a 12 year old refridgerator that can still be repaired.

    4. Re:Well give and take credit from Microsoft by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      So - what other software company is still patching eight-year old OS? Sun? IBM? SCO? Novell? Apple?

      Your question is not quite fair. The relevant question is what OS's are eight years old, and have no published security vulnerabilities for which you cannot easily acquire a fix?

      Looking at this from the point of view of a customer, I want to buy an OS and in eight years I want it to still be usable and secure and I preferably want it to be that way at no extra cost. I'm planning on running this platform long-term, and I recognize that my applications may end up tied to that platform. What would you choose?

      • Microsoft - historically support some systems as long as 8 years, but refuse to fix vulnerabilities that are too difficult. The end result is the OS is supported, but insecure in 8 years. MS may support some or all future releases for up to eight years but is not legally obligated to do so. It is possible MS will go under (unlikely) and their OS will not have any support.
      • Sun - Definitely supports OS's for more than 8 years, including security fixes. Currently releases their OS as open source so any current versions are guaranteed to be fixable for a price even if Sun is not around or changes their policies.
      • IBM - IBM is currently shipping multiple OS's, Linux being a major one. They or someone else can support Linux basically forever because it is open source and you even can get competitive bids on the support and fixes.
      • Apple - Support for at least three years, but I don't see any published commitment beyond that. OS is a mix of open/closed source so most security problems will be fixable by consultants forever, but some may not be.
      • SCO - Will be dead soon, next.
      • Novell - Same as IBM except even more focused on Linux. Basically guaranteed competitive support forever mostly free, but possibly at a price for specific problems.

      From a consumer looking to have an OS supported and secure for 8 years I can tell you MS certainly does not look like a good choice to me. They are the only OS vendor you listed I know of that still has open, unfixed and unfixable vulnerabilities in an OS under ten years old. You seem to have mistaken "support" for "fixes vulnerabilities." Both are valuable but MS only does one for any length of time.

  18. Re:"interesting" my ass by Blarrrg · · Score: 0, Troll
  19. Scanner? by Fear+the+Clam · · Score: 5, Funny

    "...eEye security, which has released a free scanner to help network admins identify vulnerable computers.

    What, the Windows startup screen wasn't sufficient to identify vulnerable computers?

    1. Re:Scanner? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Source code has been leaked :

      #include
      int main(int argc, char *argv[])
      {
          #ifdef WIN32
              printf("You are vulnerable\n");
          #else
              printf("You are safe\n");
          #endif

          return EXIT_SUCCESS;
      }

    2. Re:Scanner? by wgray8231 · · Score: 1

      "What, the Windows startup screen wasn't sufficient to identify vulnerable computers?"

      Apparently, this isn't obvious enough for the IT community at large. Many of them still consider Winblows to be top-notch.

    3. Re:Scanner? by saskboy · · Score: 1

      "What, the Windows startup screen wasn't sufficient to identify vulnerable computers?"

      As many computer customers tell me, "I don't know how I got a virus, I run Scandisk and Defrag every week!"

      --
      Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  20. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hundreds of vulnerabilities discovered in Linux since the release of a distro:

    http://www.mandriva.com/security/advisories?dis=10 .1

    But of course, that's not newsworthy because it doesn't involve hating Microsoft. This ain't a troll; it's an attempt to show that BOTH systems have pretty lame security track records, yet all we hear about is Windows.

    Look at that list above. Given 300 million clueless users running that Mandrake instead of Windows, don't you think there'd be exploits for that plenthora of holes too?

    1. Re:In other news... by Zunni · · Score: 1

      It's not sexy to make Linux look bad... And even if you do the zealots will simply fire back "What do you want, it's free..."

    2. Re:In other news... by BabyDave · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Hundreds of vulnerabilities discovered in Linux since the release of a distro: http://www.mandriva.com/security/advisories?dis=10 .1
      Of course, Windows doesn't come with the hundreds (thousands?) of applications that Mandriva does, and so it's a bit unfair to compare the Mandriva security advisory list (which includes fixes for MySQL, Apache, Perl, Mozilla, Vi, etc etc) to the Windows list.
  21. link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    right here

    -WH

  22. Just Upgrade by Sinju · · Score: 0, Troll

    It isn't all that expensive anymore just to get an upgrade to Windows XP and volia problem solved, well for w2k anyways. And w2k is way out of date by computer standards. In about 3 months stuff is out of date in computer standards so 5 years?!?!?! A much better upgrade would be just go with Linux. More security all around.

    1. Re:Just Upgrade by Yo_mama · · Score: 1
      It isn't all that expensive anymore just to get an upgrade to Windows XP

      Maybe not for one machine, but how about for 500, 1,000, or 10,000?

      --
      Never understimate the power of human stupidity -Lazarus Long
    2. Re:Just Upgrade by Skruffy42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I still have people using 75Mhz machines with windows 95, and most of my users are running 2000. We don't need to or have the budget to upgrade everyone to a new box with XP on it just so they can use word/excel, and email each other porn.

    3. Re:Just Upgrade by Sinju · · Score: 1

      Yes well what about linux then? It is definately a upgrade that is affordable if you have the time. And if you get the right Linux it will run on any machine just about and has more security for sure.

    4. Re:Just Upgrade by Tourney3p0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How exactly is Windows 2000 "out of date" by any standard except the date it was released? Windows XP is horrid compared to Windows 2000. Very few people I know have "upgraded" to Windows XP from Windows 2000. It's easier and cheaper to open the case and remove a stick of ram. Install a Yoshi's Island skin, and you have instant 2000->XP upgrade. Mentalities such as yours are why you need a 3 Ghz P4 and 512 MB of RAM just to open Microsoft Word in less than 30 seconds.

    5. Re:Just Upgrade by Sinju · · Score: 1

      Windows 2000 doesn't have as much security as XP for one. And the only time I do use Windows is to play games because Linux as of yet does not have many major game creators. And I don't like Intel either ;). I use a duel-core amd and 2gigs of Corsair XMS Speed Series ram. Which goes to a whole subject all togather... If you want to be more productive when you are working it tends to help to have a fast computer to process all the information or render a 3d object. It is a major time saver.

    6. Re:Just Upgrade by Tourney3p0 · · Score: 1
      Windows 2000 doesn't have as much security as XP for one.

      Care to elaborate on this one? Because I'm going to call bullshit. Windows XP and 2000 are prone to pretty much the exact same vulnerabilities and exploits. XP has some 2000 doesn't, and vice versa. Overall if you put a vanilla machine on the internet and walk away for a couple of days, they're both guaranteed to be spam zombies. Likewise, do updates on both and they'll both be pretty solid.

      On that subject, try doing some filesharing. Windows XP is so secure, it doesn't even need the security tab on folders anymore! To be fair, in XP Pro you can enable it to use the "Advanced" Windows 2000 security model, but if you're using XP Home then you're out of luck. Want to let your roommate write to a share? No problem, just enable write access. Don't be surprised when your neighbor leaves you a nice little note thanking you for the extra storage space, though. If you want to be more productive when you are working it tends to help to have a fast computer to process all the information or render a 3d object.

      You're in what is known as a minority. Most people don't play games, and have absolutely no need for 2 gigs of ram and dual-core. However, because of people who say, "Upgrade to Windows XP! It's somehow better, just look at the date!", my mom will soon need to toss in a Radeon video card to properly render Clippy.

    7. Re:Just Upgrade by toadlife · · Score: 1

      "Care to elaborate on this one? Because I'm going to call bullshit. Windows XP and 2000 are prone to pretty much the exact same vulnerabilities and exploits. XP has some 2000 doesn't, and vice versa."

      You can call bullshit all you want, but you are wrong. Windows XP does have more security features than Windows 2000. If you had bothered to read Mirosoft's bulletin on the PnP vulnerability discussed in this article you would know that. There are many other example of exploits that affect Win2k, and either don't work or don't work as well on XP - especially XP with SP2 installed.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    8. Re:Just Upgrade by Tourney3p0 · · Score: 1
      If you had bothered to read Mirosoft's bulletin on the PnP vulnerability discussed in this article you would know that.

      I read it. I took particular interest in the fact that Windows XP was on the vulnerable list. So you still get owned, only slightly less owned. That makes me want to shell out the money.

      There are many other example of exploits that affect Win2k, and either don't work or don't work as well on XP

      There are many other examples of exploits that affect WinXP, and either don't work or don't work as well on 2000. I'll provide examples when you do.

      - especially XP with SP2 installed.

      If we have time to install the patch that fixes it on XP, we have time to install the patch that fixes it on 2k.

    9. Re:Just Upgrade by 10101001+10101001 · · Score: 1

      I hope you're kidding. Yoshi's Island has a much more attractive design than XP. Analogies to PlaySkool and Barney would seem much more appropriate.

      --
      Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
    10. Re:Just Upgrade by toadlife · · Score: 1

      "I read it. I took particular interest in the fact that Windows XP was on the vulnerable list. So you still get owned, only slightly less owned."

      More like, "slightly *not* owned". You must not have read it very carefully.

      In order to remotely exploit XPSP2 or 2k3 with this vulnrabililty the attacker must have administrative credentials on the machine. COrrect me I'm wrong, but if someone has an admin account on your Windows box, are not you already owned?

      "There are many other examples of exploits that affect WinXP, and either don't work or don't work as well on 2000. I'll provide examples when you do."

      Many of the examples I'm referring to are recent IE exploits I've seen which don't affect XPSP2. No, I wont look up examples for you, as you already seem have made up your mind.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    11. Re:Just Upgrade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're saying that a patched Windows XP machine is more stable than an unpatched Windows 2000 machine. I don't think he or anyone else is disagreeing.

    12. Re:Just Upgrade by toadlife · · Score: 1

      " You're saying that a patched Windows XP machine is more stable than an unpatched Windows 2000 machine."

      No, I did not say that.

      I said a fully patched Windows XP machine is less vulnerable to this exploit than a fully patched Win2k machine.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
  23. MOD UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    +1 useful

  24. Exploits circulate after bug report by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    The exploits appeared not to exist before they were reported and announced. Now they do. This is not such a problem, since there is a patch available.

    However, it does make me suspicious of the dogma of some white hat hackers, that black hats may already know about vulnerabilities so there's no reason not to give full exposure.

    1. Re:Exploits circulate after bug report by bhudson · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you are a black hat, and have a working exploit, you generally don't want to blast it all over the net, but use it judiciously to get as much as possible out of it before it is discovered. Once it becomes commonly known, and a patch exists, you know you don't have much time left, so you take advantage of it as much as possible.

      I'm not saying that is the case with this particular exploit, but Microsoft wants everyone to believe that we wouldn't have to worry about exploits if those white hats would just stop finding problems with MS software.

    2. Re:Exploits circulate after bug report by zaffir · · Score: 1

      My guess is that some black hats have known about this for a while. However anyone who knew about it before it was patched would be ostracized from the community if they let it out into the wild. But when the hole was made public, they were free to release the exploit.

      --
      "Upon attaching the waterblock to my penis, I began to notice that I know nothing about computers." -- JRockway
    3. Re:Exploits circulate after bug report by Keeper · · Score: 1

      If that were the case, the exploit would have been released hours after the patch, not days.

  25. nessus plugins available by sgt+scrub · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you need to test the machines on your network Nessus http://nessus.org/ has released plugins.

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    1. Re:nessus plugins available by ninja_assault_kitten · · Score: 1, Informative

      Yes, and you have to be a direct feed user to get them. At least for the next several days.

  26. Win 98 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes my Windows 98 Second Edition PC is not affected ;) This has to be a first...yes/no???

  27. Too many services on your Windows2000 box mabe? by alexandreracine · · Score: 0, Redundant


    This may be a little hard comment, but do 100% of Windows 2000 servers really need the plug and play service to be running? Mabe 1% really need it. For the others, just deactivate it and future bugs and holes wont touch you. I think it is a pretty good practice to deactivate everything that you dont need!

    Don't beleive me? I only work in a computer security company, what do I know? ;)

    --
    No sig for now.
    1. Re:Too many services on your Windows2000 box mabe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I only work in a computer security company (answering phones), what do I know?"

  28. And Linux doesen't?!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Red Hat ends support for OSes that are only 12 months old! Some distros won't update anything > 6 months old! Linux is THE WORST for long term support.

    And Apple has dumped more products cold than Microsoft ever has.

    Microsoft has actually be quite good on this in the PC arena.

    1. Re:And Linux doesen't?!?!? by chez69 · · Score: 2, Informative

      the enterprise versions are supported for 3 years. fedora is just a testbed, most of the folks that use it (including me) realize this.

      if you want long term support, buy something that has it.

      --
      PHP is the solution of choice for relaying mysql errors to web users.
  29. Exploiting the Exploit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The company distributing this requires you provide personal information just to pick up a small scanner which is entirely unnecessary. The purpose it seems behind distributing these little tools is to collect this information for sale and for use in sales.

    I would recommend that users stop using slashdot.org as a way to distribute pointless software in an attempt to collect free user data.

    1. Re:Exploiting the Exploit by ninja_assault_kitten · · Score: 0

      Uhm, you are truly a master of the obvious. Why else would they give it away for free?

      And how is it unncessary? I suppose you'd prefer the next least expensive alternative, paying $1200 for a Nessus direct feed license to get the plugin right now?

    2. Re:Exploiting the Exploit by Bassman59 · · Score: 1
      "The company distributing this requires you provide personal information just to pick up a small scanner which is entirely unnecessary. The purpose it seems behind distributing these little tools is to collect this information for sale and for use in sales."

      When asked for personal information, I usually enter:

      Name: George W. Bush
      Address: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washingon, DC 20500, (202) 456-1414
      E-Mail: president@whitehouse.gov

      I find this useful when applying for the discount cards at the local supermarkets.

  30. Sort of Offtopic but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    eEye is hands down the most retarded name I've ever heard in my life.

  31. Lip service to privacy by Vainglorious+Coward · · Score: 1


    In similar vein, note that you have to fill in your email twice . A classic example of why "double opt-in" is utterly meaningless.

    --
    My next sig will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush
  32. steps ahead by fihzy · · Score: 4, Funny


    Once again: (original at http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=71367&cid=6457 101)

    10) find big remote vulnerability in product
    20) perfect the exploit
    30) have fun with it for months
    40) find another big hole in same product
    50) perfect exploit for hole
    60) alert vendor about original hole
    70) have fun with new hole
    80) goto 40

    1. Re:steps ahead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fortune cookie says:
      "have fun with new hole" ...in bed

  33. Here's some news for you, chum. by Anti-Trend · · Score: 3, Informative

    First of all, Linux distros support every package on the system, not just the core files like MS update. That means perl, MySQL, apache, even the modules for apache. Everything. With that in mind, compare the Secunia security reports for Mandrake 10.0 and Windows XP Pro 10.0, which hit the market at about the same time. Have a look at the amount of unpatched vulnerabilities in both and see if you can still come to the same conclusions. Sheesh!

    --
    Working in a DevOps shop is like playing in a band made up entirely of keytarists.
  34. OB Pun by chooks · · Score: 0

    So would their scanner software be called eEye eEye 0?

    --
    -- The Genesis project? What's that?
  35. Win2k still supported for security fixes by Kelson · · Score: 1

    This actually has been patched in Win2k. Microsoft will continue with security patches for Windows 2000 through 2010. Their current policy for business-related software is 5 years "mainstream" support plus 5 more of security fixes. For "home" stuff, it's 5 years and you're done. This has some interesting consequences, such as Windows XP Professional being semi-supported through 2011 but Windows XP Home expiring at the end of 2006.

    Source: http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/

  36. Let's Hear Ira Winkler Now by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 2, Interesting


    He's been writing that Mike Lynn did the industry a disservice by revealing the buffer overflow class of Cisco vulnerabilities.

    His logic is that as soon as you reveal a vulnerability, you accelerate the exploits, and therefore vulnerabilities should not be revealed. (In other words, the classic "security through obscurity argument.")

    He seems to think it makes more work for him and other security people.

    I pointed out to him that if we follow his logic, no vulnerability and no patch would ever be released. Here we have exploits following a patch. Does he now think Microsoft should not have released the advisory and patch because it "accelerated" the development of an exploit which will affect unpatched systems?

    This is exactly his logic with Mike Lynn's actions. He claims revealing the buffer flaws, even though Cisco has patched the two actual flaws found, will cause an exploit to appear that will affect unpatched systems and cause him "more work."

    I pointed out to him that he should thus blame Microsoft for patching the SQL Server flaws even though most admins didn't patch their servers in time for the worms that took advantage of them.

    I also pointed out to him that if he thinks security is easy and he can't handle the "extra work" exploits cause, get out of the business.

    His real motivation, of course, which I also pointed out to him, was simply sour grapes that he didn't get the press for revealing the flaws. The security business is very competitive, and every time a researcher announces something, everybody else denounces him as wrong, premature, or not following proper "protocol." All this just to keep THEIR names - and by extension, the same vulnerabilities they're complaining about - in the trade press. It's hypocritical.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    1. Re:Let's Hear Ira Winkler Now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahem, Linux does the same thing (not publishing exploits right away), it's called vendor security.

      I don't know about Ira Winkler, but the basic logic you describe is done by all the major Linux distros: publish an exploit to the closed vendor security list, if the exploit is not fixed reasonably quickly it is published to the public.

      That is my understanding at least...

  37. Eye Scanner by Malyven · · Score: 1

    I know that this is probably redundant by now. But seriously what is the point in releasing a FREE scanner that is limited to 16 ip's. I have over 400 workstations that I was going to scan with the nice FREE scanner offered by Eye. GAH

  38. Why I love Microsoft problems! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am a computer/network consultant supporting small business in my small city. I put Linux in where I can, but most companies run Windows. I have found if I put in a Linux box, I never hear from them again. At least with Windows I know I hear from them in at least 6 months. If everyone switches to Linux I will be out of computer work and probably have to flip burgers. Thank you MS!

    1. Re:Why I love Microsoft problems! by Electric+Eye · · Score: 1

      You're right on, man. I specialize in Macs, but my Windows client base has been growing by leaps and bounds this year. Number one problem? Spyware. In fact, I'm launching my biz to go FT next month (really). I haven't been this busy EVER, and it's the middle of August! Thanks, Microsoft!

  39. Can you say, by PhoenixPath · · Score: 1

    "Evergreen?" I mean, c'mon... How many times have we seen this headline?

  40. exploits probably created from patches by geekee · · Score: 1

    " The exploits came out after the announcement and not before. It begs the question, do we need to give M$ credit for pushing the patch before the exploit became common knowledge? Compare this to Cisco who tried to squash recent publicizing of their vulnerability."

    I think it reinforces the idea that people create exploits by reverse engineering patches. MS was right on this one.

    --
    Vote for Pedro
    1. Re:exploits probably created from patches by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      I think it reinforces the idea that people create exploits by reverse engineering patches

      Professional crackers do not release their exploits, they use them for profit. This may reinforce the idea that the second tier of crackers writes their exploits after shown how. Thus forcing Microsoft to do something.

      MS was right on this one

      You don't know that.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
  41. Easiest by bogie · · Score: 1

    use spam.la or dodgeit.com or mailinator.com etc. I've been very happy with spam.la. Unfortunately there are plently of jerky admins out there that ban you from using these sites but still 95% of the time they work fine.
    I'll also mention the bugmenot firefox extension since many others do, but personally I find it kind of useless. Beyond mega site like nytimes.com it doesnt' seem to work well. Anyway just figured it was worth mentioning.

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  42. Why is this modded funny? Oh wait... by Gordo_1 · · Score: 1

    A remotely exploitable vulnerability existed in several widely deployed operating systems for exactly 5 years, 4 months and 9 days before a patch was offered. Since we all know that everyone patches their systems the very day a patch is released, there is no need to worry about silly propagating exploits!

    Furthermore, if you are a network admin who's deployed ISS protection agents (ISS initially discovered the bug), you would have been protected since March 2005, meaning the vulnerability would have been exposed in your network for only 5 years!

    And people are worrying about so-called 'blackhats' exploiting so-called 'unknown' vulnerabilities? Hah, this really *is* funny!

  43. OT: sig by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

    I'm just curious; is your sig the Latin version of Godwin's Law?

    1. Re:OT: sig by chooks · · Score: 0

      It means: Eat hot lead, nazi zombie robot commandos. I wish I could say that I came up with it, but I saw it in a brit newspaper when I was doing some backpacking in Europe and thought it was pretty funny. It came off a column about how useful latin is and I almost used another one in there for my .sig: 'Nisi mecum concubueris, phobistae vicerint' (If you don't sleep with me, the terrorist have won). /. didn't quite seem to be the place for something like that though...

      Apparently there is a collection of choice latin bits like this in _X-Treme Latin: Unleash Your Inner Gladiator_ by Henry Beard.

      --
      -- The Genesis project? What's that?
  44. Here are some details by toadlife · · Score: 1

    With XPSP2, and Win2k3, the plug and play exploit requires that the attacker to be able to initiate connections to TCP ports 139 and 445, and have an *ADMINISTRATIVE ACCOUNT* on the machine.

    If the attacker has an adminstrative account on the machine, why the $#@! bother to exploit this vulnerability when they allreay have carte blanche access?

    For WinXPSP1, and WIN2k it's more serious. For WinXPSP1 the attacker only needs a regular user account, and for Win2k, the exploit can be done anonymously.

    The second exploit code affects Internut Exploder. For desktop users stupid enough to use IE as their browser, this is an issue, but it's not much of an issue for windows servers, and non IE users.

    --
    I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
  45. BEGS THE QUESTION? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear ignoramous,

    You have no clue what "begs the question" means. Please stop pretending to be intellectual; you are embarrassing the species. Thank you and kindly stay out of the gene pool.

    Regards,
    The Human Race

  46. Troll? by toadlife · · Score: 1

    I take it slashdot is handing out mod-points to the baboons today?

    --
    I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
  47. Gibson Research circa 2001 by frugala · · Score: 1

    This is OLD news. Steve Gibson warned us about "UnPlug N Pray" way back in 2001. http://grc.com/UnPnP/UnPnP.htm

  48. MS Support lifelines by SkiifGeek · · Score: 1

    I do know of the 5/10 year split for Microsoft products, but I also believe that there will still be a large number of organisations running Windows 2000, come 2010, and they won't be upgrading. It is like the current concern over Cisco's IOS. Yes, they have patched the vulnerability Mike Lynn used as his example (stealthily in the April update), but there will be a not-insignificant number of network devices that will never see this patch, or others that are needed to protect against the newly described attack vector.

    I know of some large government bodies interested in various matters of security and privacy, who are still stuck with NT4 on their outward facing systems (and internal). Where is the ongoing support for them? Yes, they probably should have upgraded by now, and they probably have already started a rollout, but it hasn't finished, and they possibly remain vulnerable, given the root of Win 2000, XP, 2003, which were all affected by these latest vulnerabilities.

  49. why does PNP accept connections anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder why the PNP function was bound to a server socket anyway? Seems like a bad idea to me.

  50. source code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    im not a fan of eeye so here is the source code of the exploit for people to play with.

    its not in the wild its in the public domain now http://seclists.org/lists/pen-test/2005/Aug/0183.h tml anyone who wants the binary for the scanner check below

    http://www.eeye.com/html/Research/Tools/exe/Retina UMPNP.exe

  51. And HERE it is.... by JRHelgeson · · Score: 1
    Why should the bad guys be the only ones with it?

    http://www.frsirt.com/exploits/20050811.MS05-039.c .php

    --
    Good security is based upon reality and common sense. Common sense is a function of having common knowledge.
  52. Not new, these bugs have been apparent for 5yrs+ by bouma · · Score: 1

    I clearly remember pluging in a scanner or something to a win2k machine in about 1999 (yeah pretty sure 2k was out) in a computer lab and the machine couldnt load the default profile or something, anyway it reverted to a less locked down desktop which was a way to exploit this security problem 5years ago. So, exploits circulated for this 5years ago ;)

  53. Awesome! by GISGEOLOGYGEEK · · Score: 1

    So now, when MS releases patches (a GOOOD thing), they are hated because of the assholes that take the patches and make exploits.

    And so we see the cycle of /. life, where the assholes that cause the problems are revered, and the company that is trying to fix its problems continues to be hated.

    I suppose you'd prefer MS to NOT patch any problems? So you can keep hating them for doing nothing?

    A friendly reminder - Obscurity is not security. Let the patches come!

    --
    George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
  54. Beg the question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It doesn't 'beg the question'!!! [insert rant about grammar and expressions here]