Symantec Users, Start Your Keyloggers

An anonymous reader writes "Script kiddies have been taking advantage of intrusion prevention features of Symantec's Norton Firewall and Norton Internet Security Suites to knock users offline in IRC channels, according to an amusing post at Washingtonpost.com. From the article: 'Turns out that if someone types "startkeylogger" or "stopkeylogger" in an IRC channel, anyone on the channel using the affected Norton products will be immediately kicked off without warning. These are commands typically issued by the Spybot worm, which spreads over IRC and peer-to-peer file-swapping networks, installing a program that records and transmits everything the victim types (known as a keylogger).' Makes you wonder what other magic keywords produce unexpected results with Symantec's software."

Comments

+++ATH

[petard]

People just don't learn very well from past mistakes...

Re:+++ATH

[Ungrounded Lightning]

There was also the "ANSI Standard Back Door".

Some of the early not-too-smart (pre-computer-running-the-show) terminals - notably the "Ann Arbor Terminals" terminal, the DEC VT105, and anything following the ANSI standard for terminal operation which was based on them - had several "soft keys".
  - These could be configured to send any desired sequence of up to maybe 128 or so characters when hit.
  - They were configured by an escape sequence.
  - The escape sequence could be delivered from the far end of the link. (Typically was, by a program setting up the softkey.)
  - The escape sequence setting the key would not produce any visual indication on the screen that this was being done (so as not to corrupt the screen).
  - The key could also be "struck" by another escape sequence, also deliverable from the remote end.
  - Some talk/chat features (think "stone-age instant messaging") did NOT filter out escape sequences in inter-user messages.

What this meant was that a user (especially one running an early terminal emulator on an early home computer - like an Apple ][) could compose a message to another user that would reprogram one of his softkeys to send anything the malicious user wanted and "hit" it remotely. The time-sharing machine in the middle would interpret the command as if it came from the victim. (This was especially handy if the victim happened to be logged in as the equivalent of a superuser at the time.)

If the message was a multiple command to disable keysroke echoing at the start and reenable it at the end it might not show up at all. (Or screen control stuff could be included to blank out the echoed command before it could be noticed.)

There were revs to the terminals to disable this. But installing them made the terminal no longer standards compliant. B-)

One thing for sure.

[techno-vampire]

This is a very elegant trick; using the victim's anti-virus software as the tool to kick them off the net. Not only that, but you can do this to any number of people who happen to be on that channel and use the affected product. Now, if we could only get the skript kiddies to put their minds to something productive...

Re:One thing for sure.

[NitsujTPU]

Dude... what are you talking about? Script kiddies are called script kiddies because they steal other people's ideas. They aren't actually coming up with anything.

It wasn't a script kiddie who figured out that this works, it was a "hacker" (or a "cracker").

It's not like some kid spent hours figuring this out. These kids were told by someone who figured it out, who would not be referred to as a script kiddie.

Re:One thing for sure.

[mboverload]

With all due respect to people who use Norton,

Only script kiddies use Norton. Seriously.

Yep, it works...

[xx_toran_xx]

startkeylogger -- phonex has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) -- TomA has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) -- something3280 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer

protection? yeah, right

[psycho chic]

and people pay for that crap?

thats a really scary concept, that the very programs we rely on to protect our computers are so incredibly insecure that a couple keystrokes can completely disable our protection. you would think that if we are expected to pay a company to protect us, that they would do their best. this day in age, that is NOT the best they can do. Not a chance.

Re:protection? yeah, right

[macklin01]

thats a really scary concept, that the very programs we rely on to protect our computers are so incredibly insecure that a couple keystrokes can completely disable our protection. you would think that if we are expected to pay a company to protect us, that they would do their best. this day in age, that is NOT the best they can do. Not a chance.

From what I understood, the keystrokes weren't disabling the protection, but rather activating it, i.e., shutting down the chat session to prevent it from triggering malware. - Paul

MMORPG affected?

[kindbud]

If I am dueling with a leet player on WoW, will this work to kick him off the game? Would I be able to gank him before the server times him out?

No surprise here...

[Radi-0-head]

Anyone who uses Symantec software with the expectation that it will actually protect them from anything deserves whatever they get.

I deal with hundredes of machines monthly, and it's always the NIS/Norton Antivirus machines that have been completely compromised without Norton making a peep.

US companies suck at malware detection. I've found the eastern European companies to be among the best.

Doesn't affect me

[GAATTC]

I have Symantec's Norton Firewall and when I type startkeylogge

Best Part of This + Fix for Problem

[The MAZZTer]

It doesn't have to be spoken text. If an incoming packet is caught by norton firewall with a keyword in it, the connection is closed reguardless of where it is.

Which means you can change your nick to one of the words.

Or even more devlishly, put it in your ident where noone will notice it. Your speech will be so powerful it will knock people off the internet. Or is it your breath...

PS: Another keyword that works is "stopspy", which is more useful for idents. I don't normally take advantage of stuff like this but it's too good to pass up.

To redeem myself, I will mention that you can work around this by turning off some filter called "Spybot keylogger" or something under advanced options.

And now, ladies and gentlemen...

[Spy der Mann]

Type "start" and "key" and "logger" together and something funny happens!
<n00b>startkeylogger
* n00b has Quit IRC (G-Lined - Banned from AustNet: This address has been used for deliberately try to disconnect others)
<user1>ROFLMAO!
<user2>Dude, stop doing that
<user1>Don't worry, he won't do it again
<user2>LOL!

norton has got to be the least secure virus produc

[Blymie]

Why?

Because you have to run Norton as the administrator, if you want updates. You *used* to be able to get around this, by installing Norton as an admin, then setting up a cron (scheduled tasks :P ) to do the updates. However, Norton actually *disabled* the ability to do this in its latest versions. For the last year or so, you MUST run Norton as the administrator to get updates. Put another way, you have to log in once a day as administrator, or you never receive virus updates.

Lame? Yes, it is. Their techincal support staff find nothing odd about this, and their sales staff try to sell you an inordinately expensive "professional" product which does allow you to run as a normal user, and have updates occur without logging in as admin every 5 minutes. This is just sad. Every XP user should be running as a non-admin. Norton should be *encouraging* that.

I thought these people were trying to *help* security? The last thing I want anyone to do, is run as administrator on an XP box. Sure, you don't get the same level of security that you do under Linux, when one runs as a normal user, but it's still *very preferable* to run as a non-admin user for your day to day tasks, under XP.

There are so many "business" class products that don't understand such a simple concept. I've seen income tax software that must be run as the admin user under XP. Anti-virus software though??! That's just absurd.

Bitcom too

[Reziac]

Remember the old Bitcom for DOS? if you were reading messages on a BBS, and if in one of those messages you encountered the phrase "NO CARRIER", Bitcom would helpfully hang up the modem!

Workaround for that dumb +++ problem

[Myria]

There actually was a simple workaround for that problem that almost all modems support. The standard command ATS2= sets which ASCII value is your modem escape code: the default value 33 is +.

However, the value 255 was special: if you do ATS2=255, the +++ escape feature is disabled entirely. In this mode, you hang up by dropping the "terminal ready" bit on the serial port - something that can't be faked like +++. This has the disadvantage that you can't switch to command mode without hanging up, but that feature was rarely used (especially because data sent by the other side while in command mode gets dropped).

This feature was frequently used by BBSs to stop this kind of thing from happening (IE, people doing +++ATH ATDT911).

Meow,

Melissa