Skype Worm Infects Windows PCs

walterbays writes with news of a worm spreading to Windows PCs through Skype's IM. The worm is variously called Ramex.a and Pykspa.d. A poster on a Skype forum explains how to remove it. "After hijacking contacts from an infected machine's Skype software, it sends messages to those people that include a live link. Recipients who blithely click on the URL — which poses as a JPG image but is actually a download to a file with the .scr extension — wind up infected."

Comments

Worm?

[Hatta]

Recipients who blithely click on the URL -- which poses as a JPG image but is actually a download to a file with the .scr extension -- wind up infected.

I'm sure I won't be the first to point out that such an attack vector is not a worm.

Re:Worm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Given your position of first post, I can't see how you could be anything but the first to point out this.

Re:Worm?

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

That is a good point, and I must admit I thought that as well ... at first. Then I started thinking, How long is something really first? Is something first always first? Like the first European to visit the Americas, Columbus. He was first, but only for 400 odd years before we discovered that the vikings were the first. Also, one can never be so certain that time travel will never exist. Therefore, all of our first records in any given field may be only temporary, before some one from the future comes back and does it first.

I applaud the gp's modesty, and four dimensional thinking. I think we should all be a little more considerate of our resources, both natural and produced, in light of the fact that they may belong to someone else before us, in the future.

Re:Worm?

[Doctor-Optimal]

Ooh, a lesson in not changing history from mister "I'm-my-own-grandpa"!

F-Secure info

[CXI]

F-Secure has information as well.

Skype itself is blameless

[ZwJGR]

Skype itself is (mostly) blameless, how can they be expected to protect users from this sort of attack (perhaps by pointing out to users that the link/download they're clicking on is a screensaver exe..., but Windows ought to tell you that anyway...)
Naming it a worm is a minor overstatement as well.
It propagates by user incompetence, not by a technical flaw...

These sort of malware executables circulate on email lists (and I daresay, other IM networks) already, so it's no surprise that Skype has "joined the club" of being big enough to attract unwanted attention...

Re:Skype itself is blameless

[jimicus]

It propagates by user incompetence, not by a technical flaw...

If the last 8-10 years have taught the IT industry nothing else, we should at least be well aware by now that basing your security on "user never does anything stupid" is a pretty effective way to ensure that the user's system will be emailing everyone and his dog adverts for Geniun Vigara!!!111 (sic) by the end of the day.

Re:Skype itself is blameless

[gowen]

Skype itself is (mostly) blameless

You what? Their program runs executable content from a URL without a warning or asking for confirmation. That's insanely bad design.

Skype's revenge

[Nimey]

They're getting back at all the people who rebooted last month.

Re:Software diversity is a good thing.

[abigor]

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Re:Software diversity is a good thing.

[Opportunist]

And how? By not implementing a messenging system the moron user can click and infect himself?

Where's Skype to blame if someone gets a link sent and clicks it without even trying to see what's behind it?

FIXED

[Anonymous Coward]

s/some of the //

Re:Amazing

[recoiledsnake]

Uh. IE7 on Vista runs in a sandbox(note that this is to mitigate the damage caused by buffer overflows in IE code and not intended to sandbox executable/virus code), and warns you square whenever that boundary is breached(by opening a PDF, EXE or SCR, for example). Additionally, if the EXE requests admin privileges(required to install a rootkit, for example), the infamous UAC dialog appears. And if someone gives admin access when they wanted to view a JPEG, how is it Windows' or Skype's fault? Also, most versions of windows I have used(since 95) ask before opening executable files(even .SCR) So, Windows does not "still" allow un-sandboxed applications to run just clicking links. If users expect a JPEG but get a .scr or exe they have plenty of time/opportunity to click NO. This is not Windows or Skype's fault. It's just clueless users getting owned.

Re:"blithely"

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering the definition and my general knowledge from doing tech support, I'd say just about all of them:

blithely:
1- of a happy lighthearted character or disposition
2- lacking due thought or consideration

Microsoft's fault?

[sconeu]

With the default behavior of hiding the extension, XP leaves non-technically proficient users vulnerable to this.

Re:Microsoft's fault?

[recoiledsnake]

I fail to see how that behavior makes a difference here. The user clicks on a link that ends in .JPG, and the browser asks him to run or save an SCR file. No hiding the extension is involved here. If the user runs it, BAM. If he saves it, THEN he or someone else would not be able to see the extension and would run it(Though I think XP SP2 pops up a warning about it being a file from the internet zone, not sure if the full filename shows up in the warning though).

Hiding the extension is a very most annoying thing though, it's the first setting that I change on a new install of Windows.

Re:Microsoft's fault?

[cbhacking]

I think XP SP2 pops up a warning about it being a file from the internet zone, not sure if the full filename shows up in the warning though It doesn't matter, since jpegs (non-executable data files in general) don't present that warning (The text of the warning is something along the line of "this type of file can harm your computer". Not to mention they would presumably notice the file type while downloading and cancel the download / delete the file. Of course, the fact that anybody GETS these warnings (I haven't gotten one in Skype, but I've seen a couple that were near-identical over AIM) means that there are people out there who are actually stupid enough to ignore the warning...

Hiding the extension is a very most annoying thing though, it's the first setting that I change on a new install of Windows. Agreed, although I actually change roughly half the options in Folder Settings. It's gotten better over time; 2000 you had to change almost all of them, XP only about 80%, Vista is down to nearly 50%. IE's default settings have gotten better too, especially with 7.

Re:Lovely

[recoiledsnake]

It does not "inject code" into Explorer any more than Notepad injects code into Explorer to run itself. An "infected user" is probably not the right person to listen to in such technical matters. FSecure has complete details on it if you're really interested here

Re:Lovely

[Peaker]

It does not "inject code" into Explorer any more than Notepad injects code into Explorer to run itself. An "infected user" is probably not the right person to listen to in such technical matters. FSecure has complete details on it if you're really interested here

Heh, I am Eyal. I admit I was "infected". Basically I clicked the "scr" link because I foolishly trusted the source of the message to be who it was, did not read the contents before clicking, I don't really give much of a damn about this Windows box, and I forgot that the "scr" extension was executable, and not just an image file (which is typically a less likely attack vector).

I assumed that since the Explorer.exe was unmodified, but explorer.exe is respawning the virus/worm's executable, that it modified Explorer's behavior in some way, perhaps by code injection. It was just speculation, ofcourse and obviously there are simpler ways to get explorer.exe to respawn your process, but it really is an unimportant detail.

Yet Again...

[RAMMS EIN]

Yet again, us Linux users are left out. The program works only on Windows/x86. And here I am, on my glorious Linux/ppc box, just having painfully gotten Skype to work...and they introduce a new feature that I can't access...boohooo!

(I kid. I hate Skype passionately (for getting everybody on a proprietary solution when open protocols exist) and would never go through any amount of trouble to get it installed on my computer.)

Re:The malware terminates a list of 534 processes.

[myowntrueself]

Seems like such a person could make money honestly.

Anyone who can make $money honestly could make N * $money dishonestly.

How do you think corporatism works? :-P

110% of them

[OrangeTide]

Most skype users don't know what blithely means. And are unaware of any fundamental difference between a spell-checker and a dictionary.