Slashdot Mirror
Symantec Reports Spate of Attacks Via Recent Windows Flaw
Surprised Giraffe writes "Symantec is warning of a sharp jump in online attacks that appear to be targeting a recently patched bug in Microsoft's Windows operating system, an analysis that some other security companies disputed. Symantec raised its Threat Con security alert level from one to two because of the attacks, with two denoting 'increased alertness.' The attacks spotted by Symantec target a flaw in the Windows Server Service that Microsoft says could be exploited to create a self-copying worm attack."
First infection!
Arbor Networks disputed Symantec's interpretation, saying, "we're not seeing this rise, not on TCP port 445 and not on TCP port 139. Looking over the last month we don't see this rise in MS08-067 attacks that would raise any alarms for us," in a Friday blog posting.
Both McAfee and Microsoft echoed those sentiments.
Seems like a shameless plug for Symantec to "look better" than their competitors. Crying wolf here won't get them the additional sales they think they will get.
Attention all planets of the Solar Federation! We have assumed control! - Neil Peart
What's the maximum? Maybe eleven, or perhaps over 9000?
Have any of these corps, in their pissing contest, ever think that maybe the problems could be compund (e.g. exploit one flaw after using another to deliver the exploit)?
Cripes - I'd be more worried about someone using a 0-day or undisclosed flaw to deliver that nasty little Vista Kernel exploit that MSFT has said it won't have patched for at least six months...
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Give us the real link, not some random .au page.
The 'levels' are :
1 - Normal alertness
2 - Increased alertness
3 - ???
4 - PROFIT !!!
@neonux
you're not only an ass, but you're also boring.
Both anti-virus vendors are a joke. I mean I am glad that they are out there but I've seen so many different Trojans and spyware bust right through McAfee and Symantec that I've completely lost faith in both products.
I just wish the virus/spyware crafters would fill their crap with some better advertisements. Throw some gaming spam my way and I won't see too many differences between Anti-virus 2009 and Madden 2009.
I can also report a spate of recent frustration via the recent Slashdot homepage changes. I can't find anything, links and blockquotes are impossible to read in some section colour schemes and there's no way to turn it off!!
May the Maths Be with you!
Virus warnings go to 0xF
I think the threat level indicated is "Elevated", which would suggest FFFF00. Windows warnings, on the other hand, are invariably 0000FF.
Seriously, though, how is a threat level from anyone supposed to be interepreted in any meaningful fashion when the levels themselves need to be interpreted as well? I'd suggest everyone adopt three levels only:
No Worries, Mate.
Mostly Harmless.
Run For Your Life.
Easy to understand and easy to remember. And more importantly, no ambiguous ordering or cross-referencing to colours.
Does any commercial add-on security software for Windows allow state-based checks yet?
Windows server services are fine inside your LAN, if you have a Linux, BSD or commercial Unix-based gateway. Otherwise, any online transaction is like running through a pickpocket convention with your money hanging out of your pockets.
"I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p
*Jack Nicholson voice*
Is there any other kind????
Anybody want to join my AntiVirus start up? We are at Threat Con Three currently and the sales are pouring in.
I will bend like a reed in the wind.
Windows isn't safe?!
If you quote this signature there'll be 72 copies of Windows ME waiting for you in Heaven.
I haven't had a problem with viruses. I run XP pro at work, with AVG, and although i have had a few viruses, from d/ling stuff, AVG finds them, and no problems. now i might ask, Where can i find thses viruses? I know that warez sites from russia care them, but how can i contract them from legit sites? I seems to me, if you doing what your suppsoed to do with a computer (pr0n browsing) you shouldnt have these problems
Go go Gadget Nailgun!
Anyone else misread that as a "shark jump in online attacks?" I was beginning to wonder if the Simpsons writers had turned to malware writing.
Definitely showing up here: http://isc.sans.org/port.html?port=445
And he did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, so he has that going for him ;)
Bark less. Wag more.
Having worked at Symantec, I can tell you that it's nothing like that. There isn't even yelling or clamoring, it's just business as usual. There aren't even any blinking lights!
Oh, and John Thompson (the current CEO) isn't involved in the decision, nor is he in the same country as the people who are.
http://www.skullsecurity.org/blog/
... just run this executable to verify my identity and we are all set!
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
Why don't we just have a running headline banner that says something like...
{someone} discovered a serious security flaw in Microsoft's {product} and {offered to sell a solution|berated Microsoft}. They say the flaw should be {ignored|taken seriously} and that if it wasn't that there was a strong possibility of {not much|major|catastrophic|universe collapsing} repercussions.
{Mac|Linux} users were reported to gloat and tell everyone they were idiots for not switching to {Mac|Linux}. BSD users were running around naked, covered in crayon scribbling, and jabbering "definitely time for BSD, definitely....or Wopner"
Microsoft responded today by {downplaying|ignoring|finally patching after months but breaking something else with the patch} the threat.
So you post a story about how Symantec are more on the ball then their competition and follow it up with comments about how their sensing capability is much more advanced than their competition without referencing any sources. This has to be the lamest astroturf I've ever seen.
Nick