Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

1 In 3 Windows PCs Still Vulnerable To Worm Attack

Posted by kdawson on from the so-patch-already dept.

CWmike writes "The worm that has infected several million Windows PCs, Downadup or 'Conficker,' is having a field day because nearly a third of all systems remain unpatched 80 days after Microsoft rolled out an emergency fix, security firm Qualys said. Downadup surged dramatically this week and has infected an estimated 3.5 million PCs so far, according to Finnish security company F-Secure Corp. The worm exploits a bug in the Windows Server service used in Windows 2000, XP, Vista, Server 2003, and Server 2008. Qualys' CTO said, 'These slow [corporate] patch cycles are simply not acceptable. They lead directly to these high infection rates.'" This is indicative of why some are calling for Microsoft to rethink Patch Tuesday, as reader buzzardsbay pointed out.

9 of 242 comments (clear)

  1. router by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is why I recommend everyone have a router installed on their internet connection, even if they have only one PC. Routers inherently block almost all worms.

    1. Re:router by corsec67 · · Score: 5, Funny

      The very nature of a router is to use NAT.

      No, the very nature of a router is to... route.
      Or do the core internet routers also NAT?
      Is China behind a large NAT? (This will probably be true in 2015, so hello people from then)

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    2. Re:router by jrumney · · Score: 5, Funny

      My ISP has a router installed on my internet connection, so I must be safe right?

  2. Genuine Advantage Validation by RichMan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I know a lot of people who are afraid of updates because of the genuine advantage validation. They got student priced versions of the software 5 years ago and are no longer students. They don't want to risk losing Visio/Word/PowerPoint or having some other software disabled on their computer.

    The fear factor of automated reporting/validation is stopping a lot of people from running the updates.

    1. Re:Genuine Advantage Validation by 0prime · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Uhhh as a former student, this seems pretty silly. I haven't had any problems with XP or the Office 2003 Suite at all. What are these people expecting Windows to do, pull their personal info, poll it to Microsoft through WGA, and have Microsoft check College enrollment records?

      I do know of one other reason why people would be afraid of WGA, though.

      --
      I am not a *blank*, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
  3. Not that bad considering it's Windows by jerep · · Score: 5, Funny

    If my years of tech support taught me anything it's that 9 out of 10 Windows users are more damaging to computers than anything else.

    --
    Do you D?
    1. Re:Not that bad considering it's Windows by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Funny
      Worse than that... It's OPEN SOURCE's fault:

      "By using the exploit from the Metasploit module as the code base, a virus/worm programmer only needs to implement functions for automatic downloading and spreading," said Xiao Chen, a McAfee security researcher, in an entry to the company's blog. "We believe that this can be accomplished by an average programmer who understands the basics of exploitation and has decent programming skills.

      "It's obvious that worm writers are abusing open-source tools to their advantage to make their work easier," Chen added.

      You all ought to be ashamed of yourselves...

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  4. Immune by Alsee · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm immune to the worm. I'm still running Windows98 and it doesn't have "Windows Server service" and all that other wormbait crap.

    Oh, hold on.... I'll be right back. I've been online 40 minutes and I need to reboot.

    -

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  5. Not Acceptable? by PolyDwarf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Qualys' CTO said, 'These slow [corporate] patch cycles are simply not acceptable. They lead directly to these high infection rates.'"

    It's also not acceptable that corporate desktops become useless because of an update that MS rolled out that broke mission-critical software.

    There's a reason there's an IT vetting process with patches (fool me once, shame on you... fool me twice, three times, every patch tuesday, shame on me). There's also a reason why those processes take a while. If you disagree with IT workers doing their jobs and making sure that an update won't screw up the network/application/productivity/company, take it up with software vendors and MS, not with the people who are trying to make sure their company stays functioning. Or will you be willing to pay for their time in fixing problems if they apply patches that break things?