AntiVirus Products Fail to Find Simple IE Malware

SkiifGeek writes "Didier Stevens recently took a closer look at some Internet Explorer malware that he had uncovered and found that most antivirus products that it was tested against failed to identify the malware through one of the most basic and straight forward obfuscation techniques — the null-byte. With enough null-bytes between each character of code, it is possible to fool all antivirus products (though additional software will trap it), yet Internet Explorer was quite happy to render the code. Whose responsibility is it to fix this behavior? Both the antivirus / anti-malware companies and Microsoft's IE team have something to answer for."

Comments

Even Slashdot's lameness filter doesn't catch it

[Pharmboy]

0×00
0×00
0×00
del /p /s c:\
0×00
0×00
0×00

Look at me, I'm a virus writer! w00+!

But seriously, is this really that hard of a problem to fix? AV can't ignore 0×00 when scanning and just read the actual code for what it is?

Re:Wouldn't the anti-virus...

[Pharmboy]

And ironicly, you can't really remove IE, since it is "Part of the Operating System (tm)". You can only make it somewhat invisible, which of course, is the second part of the definition of malware.

Re:Even Slashdot's lameness filter doesn't catch i

[Eberlin]

Virus writers tend to lean towards spreading the viruses more than they lean towards causing major destruction to the "host". Think ebola vs. common cold here.

That said, it seems my browser renders those nulls just fi [NO CARRIER]

Re:As much as I hate Microsoft...

[Pharmboy]

The rest of the responsibility is entirely that of the anti-virus writers.

Not true, as long as they are adhering to RFC 3514 then there won't be any issue. This is what we have standards for.