Slashdot Mirror
Romanians Find Cure For Conficker
mask.of.sanity writes "BitDefender has released what it claims is the first vaccination tool to remove the notorious Conficker virus that infected some 9 million Windows machines in about three months.
The worm, also known as Downadup, exploits a bug in the Windows Server service used by Windows 2000, XP, Vista, Server 2003 and Server 2008. It spreads primarily through a buffer overflow vulnerability in Windows Server Service where it disables the operating system update service, security center, including Windows Defender, and error reporting.
The Romanian security vendor said its removal tool will delete all versions of Downadup and will not be detected by the virus."
TFA even says that the worm can update itself, so how does BitDefender plan to distribute the worm if the worm can be updated to shut down everything that may harm it?
http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download
[...]some 9 million Windows machines [...]. The worm [...] exploits a bug in the Windows Server service...
Without elaborating what Windows Server service that might be... Are there really that many vulnerable, not firewalled Windows servers connected to the Internet? Or is this a Server function that has no business on a Desktop that is getting infected?
In the first case blame the administrators (for not knowing how to properly protect a Windows server), in the second case blame Microsoft (for running servers on a desktop that should not be there in the first place). I would expect the second case as that I recall we have seen before, a virus exploiting a bug in a server function that can not even be stopped on a desktop.
Until the next variant which is likely due out in the next 24 hours.
ESETs ThreatSense technology (heuristically) recognizes all the variants... F-Secure did a conflicker removal tool in 27th of February...
And above all that I'm skeptic about the "delete all versions" phrase, because BidDefender as a (bloated) AV that it is, is pretty much signature based, and has very weak heuristic detection...
$god = null;
if($god) echo 'I believe!';
In the first case blame the administrators (for not knowing how to properly protect a Windows server), in the second case blame Microsoft (for running servers on a desktop that should not be there in the first place). I would expect the second case as that I recall we have seen before, a virus exploiting a bug in a server function that can not even be stopped on a desktop.
Description of the Server service:
Supports file, print, and named-pipe sharing over the network for this computer. If this service is stopped, these functions will be unavailable. If this service is disabled, any services that explicitly depend on it will fail to start.
Dependant services: Computer Browser ("Maintains an updated list of computers on the network and supplies this list to computers designated as browsers. If this service is stopped, this list will not be updated or maintained.")
I think it starts automatically.
It can probably be disabled, but who knows...
We need a removal tool that can be run from a safe Linux environment (ie boot using a live disk etc., then run the tool from a USB drive)... not running it from inside windows where the Conficker is already running
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
OK thanks for the info.
Sounds like that having the Server service listen to localhost/loopback (assuming there is such a thing in Windows) only would close the infection vector... it should definitely not be listening to incoming connections from other computers without being explicitly instructed to do so. So we can shove this on Microsoft's poor design.
And after the recent discussion here on /. about User Access Control in XP/Vista/Win7 it again makes me wonder whether Windows as it is can be fixed at all. Its security seems broken beyond repair.
server is the NAME of a service in windows... which "Supports file, print, and named-pipe sharing over the network for this computer"
It's good to see something involving Romania and security that's positive for a change. Wait, do we know where the authors of Conficker came from? Hmmmm...
In case you don't know where Romania is, here's a link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itidLk5Dd3k
Please tag story as romaniaftw
1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
the Romanians did not find a cure for Confiker.. well put it this way.. if they just idd they are about 30 days too late. AV, as bad as it is, does in fact detect all variation and all the so called C&C nodes are now in blackholes.. so if just today the Romanian firm is trying to pimp their protection they are as you put it: "a dollar short and a day late". OLD NEWS
I hope that was sarcasm....
Well, usually the Romulans keep to themselves instead of sharing all this information, for all we know, it could be them that started it!
Something must be up in the Star Empire.
*Appends To Trek Journal*
Obligatory... Here is the link to the cure
You don't need the Server service. Or at least, I haven't needed it in the last 6 months or so. I even run IIS on my Windows box for ASP.NET development. Seems like something called 'Server' would be needed for that, right? Nope.
I would certainly disable it on all desktops. In fact, Google 'unnecessary windows services' for a list of other services that seem to serve no practical purpose.
Does it run on Linux?
This "server" service has nothing to do with what you might expect from a "server", i.e. being a big machine that hosts a lot of stuff like mail or webpages. This "server" service is an integral portion of Windows' ability to share files through the local network and access network printers. Also, some other services (IIRC the whole bunch that deals with networking, from WiFi to telephony) depends on it.
In other words, the term "server" is maybe a bit preposterous. It's just the thingie that enables networking on Windows machines.
So, IMO, it's neither. It's neither a "real" server crappily configured by admins that should get their hands tied and pushed into administration where they can't do no harm, nor is it MS's fault for putting something that only a server OS should have on a desktop. It's simply the network thingamajig gone bad.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I hope he knows that Romania made the best Anti-Virus solution ever, RAV (Romanian Anti Virus) and that Microsoft bought it. Too bad they never used it.
Sounds like this permits sharing of those items over SMB?
So, if you're not "sharing" anything on that server, then you can turn this off, yes?
Also, I wonder if this service's interaction w/ the SMB Browsers would cause any adverse affects WRT browsing "Network Neighborhood" from a machine with this service disabled.
I do not think it means what you think it means.
You seem to be working under the assumption that most servers have real admins.
Fact of the matter is, outside the very largest of companies, a very large majority of internet connected servers are run by small to medium size business who do not have a full-time IT department and/or often cannot either afford all the necessary equipment and software and man-hours necessary to secure against these threats, esp. since good security often winds up annoying a high-level manager who insists that they should be able to log in to the network and all their apps without a password and insists they have passwords to every computer in the building and that they can use myspace messenger and browse the web from the DNS server if they want to (which they will).
Also, many many many web servers are hosted with hosting companies like the one I work for where less than 5% of the 10,000+ physical servers have anything like a knowledgeable admin and are instead run by idiots in India who use cracked VoipSwitch software (which is itself virus infected, but they keep using it anyway even though the virus causes them to have to re-install every week or two). Or you get people who want to run their own website but simply don't have the skills to maintain it properly, but are convinced they don't need a real admin either... or a firewall... or anti-virus.
Oh, and the desktop has nothing to do with anything - these services would exists and be just as exploitable regardless of a GUI, as it's not the GUI that is being exploited - it's the poorly coded system services and libraries that aren't subject to any kind of external or peer review that are written by people who usually don't even know exactly what they are coding, leaving plenty of room for exploits to bad code crop up.
Funny, now that I think about it, MS treats the coding of it's OS similar to a terrorist operation, small groups of people working on compartmentalized tasks, never knowing who is doing exactly what or what the desired end-product actually is. This may be a great idea if you're a terrorist organization trying to get away with something and trying to prevent a loss of the whole project due to the capture of one or more cells, but this is not a good way to write software - I think the past 10+ years of shoddy performance and infection/exploit history of MS products should be a clear enough sign of the problem, but the MS execs are obviously too blind or ignorant to figure this out for themselves.
"Inveniemus Viam Aut Faciemus" 'We will find a way... Or we will make one!' --Hannibal of Carthage
Does he still pronounce leenooks as leenooks?
Makes sense, since it's probably a Romanian who coded the darned thing... ;)
There are over 36 million lines of COBOL code in the world, and they are all raping children.
As in Linux, you have servers whose job it is to provide services. This can be internally or externally. X server, mail server, print server etc.
Funny, now that I think about it, MS treats the coding of it's OS similar to a terrorist operation, small groups of people working on compartmentalized tasks, never knowing who is doing exactly what or what the desired end-product actually is.
Funny, now I think of it, this is EXACTLY how the whole Linux development goes on. You have a bunch doing the kernel, doing X, doing Gnome, doing Gimp, doing OOo, etc. All doing little parts of what is going to be the operating system, without having a clue of what the end product even could be. They just make sure that their little piece works fine. And for the software to communicate with each other they use some standard protocols.
Microsoft has at least some top management that will define the final look and feel (at least I assume so, any reasonable OS company would do so). So the little parts do not need to know the total, they just need to know what THEY have to do.
For example the printer server (like CUPS). They have to make sure they can address all kinds of printers on all kinds of ports, and then produce some interface for other software to talk to the printer server. The printer server people don't need to know the total picture. They just have to make sure their printer server works, and that they can answer requests according to specifications.
It seems the problem of Windows development may be that they do NOT work like that. That they want to keep it as a whole, finding interfaces to talk to all different programs in different ways, instead of standardising and creating independent components. Like Linux where you can add the components you need, and depending on the components you have a business work station (include word processor, image viewer, e-mail software), a multimedia station (install Gimp, some video editor, video and music players), or a server (do not install any GUI, instead Postfix, Apache and the rest).
The reason all these little programs can talk to each other is that they use certain standards. All open standards, official or not, some may have developed their own standard. But they use standard file formats, standard interfaces (named pipe, sockets, network) that other software also uses, and thus they can be patched together and generally work fine with each other. And then the distro producers (Mandriva, Ubuntu, Debian) test and make sure all works as expected, and optionally add bits of glue or eye candy to the whole.
Microsoft could be well off by starting to work like that. Kernel and GUI separate. Split off IE and Media Player. Set some goals for the new version, plan for each part what functionality it has to provide and how it is going to provide this to the outside world (e.g. API), and when the parts are done, glue them together. It may just work.
i just ran the bd tool on a conficker-infected XP SP2. it said that it found the infection; it then killed some processes and then prompted for a reboot. before rebooting, however, i ran http://www.enigmasoftware.com/a1/download/cfremover.exe - it detected the infection as well. after rebooting, i ran both tools again. bd tool found no infection. but the infection was still present - its presence was confirmed by enigma's removal tool. the enigma tool is able to successfully remove the infection.
on bdtools.net there seems to be a link to a sister site that can perform a quick check on your system. However I'd suggest using the IP address (http://91.199.104.31/)instead of the link since it points to bd.com which will most likely be filtered the virus
How exactly do you prevent this worm?
Disable autoplay? Autoplay is a feature though.
Disable network sharing? How annoying.
The KB958644 patch? Does that protect you, or does it simply prevent one method of catching it?
A cold is a cold, and although preventing it from entering your computer is an idea, the goal should be making the computer immune to whatever the vulnerability is.
I should have a say on what programs (what a computer virus is) are allowed to run.
What's worse is Microsoft's apparent unwillingness to let SP1 machines get patched. SP2 is more than a fix or update, it's messing with Internet Explorer adding a pop-up blocker, and it adds a firewall to your computer regardless of whether you want it. These things, coupled with some people's unwillingness to do such a thing to their computer, will probably result in more infections.
Mod me down for "rant". I am not sure if anything I said is considered constructive, other than my hint at that Microsoft should let SP1 machines be patched for major worms such as this.
well .. it's linux you're talking about. Linux and server are often met in the same sentece so people have no problem when hearing: "Your Linux has X server problems and needs reconfiguration." But the second they hear "Your File sharing Server service is disabled and you need to enable it" for windows they go like "wait; what? server?!? on my win-machine??"
see? it's just a matter of perception.
mov ax,4c00h
int 21h
available for months:
http://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/worm_w32_downadup_al.shtml
I don't know that I'd be willing to run anything from some unheard of company, especially from Romania!
Also, I thought the Windows Malicious Software Removal tool was removing Conficker now. Anyone know if that's the case or not?
The Server Service can be disabled IF you don't need to share disks/folders/files OR printers from a particular machine to other machines on your network (be that on a local home or work LAN/WAN, or, over the public internet)...
( & yes, this would "proof you" vs. this CONFICKER worm (along w/ altering ACL's (most people use right-click on filename, SECURITY tab (need to enable SIMPLE FILE SHARING option in Explorer Tools/Folder Options menus/submenus to get this tab to appear)) on the autorun.inf file in the root of your drives as well so nothing can get to it except perhaps the SYSTEM "user-entity" with FULL control rights, others can use ICACLS.EXE).
I do all of that here on a single machine connected to the internet here @ home, & it works just fine, no problems result because I am not sharing disks/files/folders from this system...
(I additionally got ahold of the known list of servers this CONFICKER worm uses & equated them to 0 inside my HOSTS file (this can be done on Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003, & on VISTA/Server 2008/Windows 7, you use 0.0.0.0 instead of 0 (since the 12/09/2008 MS "Patch Tuesday" patches made using the superior/smaller/faster 0 impossible in a HOSTS file in VISTA/Server 2008/Windows 7))).
APK
P.S.=> Unlike the article title, which imo is actually somewhat MISLEADING? This actually WOULD function as a cure, not just a removal tool, providing you don't actually need to serve up files from shared disks/folders, AND it has another "hidden benefit" in that you are no longer wasting CPU cycles, RAM, &/or other forms of I/O running a service you may not actually NEED running in the SERVER service (set to startup type DISABLED via services.msc rightclick or doubleclick properties menu for reconfiguring it)... apk
Without elaborating what Windows Server service that might be... Are there really that many vulnerable, not firewalled Windows servers connected to the Internet? Or is this a Server function that has no business on a Desktop that is getting infected?
The Server service provides file/print sharing in Windows. Technically that means it should only run on servers, but think of the number of Windows boxes (e.g. on home networks) where people use file sharing between machines. You can stop it, though.
If you de-select 'File and Print sharing' in the Windows firewall exceptions page, you block access to the Server service. (If memory serves correctly, Windows XP SP2 and Windows Server 2003 SP1 block file/print sharing by default.)
Regarding "stalling" CONFICKER specifically:
( From http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=265edfd9cff2fd6ef1993571b23d1598&t=28430&page=3 )
----
"A.) STALL SERVER SERVICE (if you don't need a LAN/WAN to connect to & all you do is hit the internet on a single standalone machine)...
AND
B.) It recommends you stall out indiscriminate usage of javascript also!
Between those 2 measures (&, possibly ALSO, a HOSTS file that stops access to this CONFICKER worm's control servers -> http://forums.opendns.com/comments.php?DiscussionID=3043 which leads to said list here -> http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/Downadup_Domain_Blocklist_February.txt)?
Hey... YOU TELL ME, lol, IF it works, or not..."
----
It'll work... addtionally blocking ACL (access control lists) access to the autorun.inf files in the root of you drives helps also (vs. how it spreads from USB sticks etc. et al).
(Do all of the above, especially if you don't need to be sharing disks/folders/files from your system to users over the public internet or a local LAN/WAN (saving CPU cycles, RAM, &/or other forms of I/O as well you would be otherwise wasting because you are not using what the server service provides, file & print sharing), & it quite literally (@ least theoretically) should "PROOF YOU" vs. this worm).
APK
P.S.=> That was regarding the /. article titled (from near when this worm was discovered):
New Conficker Variant Increases Its Flexibility:
http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/20/239229
on 02/20/3009 here on this website... apk
"It spreads primarily through a buffer overflow vulnerability in Windows Server Service where it disables the operating system update service, security center, including Windows Defender, and error reporting."
I disabled all that shit, myself, intentionally. I'm serious.
After I realized that one of the recent "hotfixes" from Microsoft installed a spyware "plugin" in Firefox, off that shit went. For good.
Is the correct term "cure" for removing a software virus?
The first 10 seconds after reading this I was trying to figure out "what's the conficker virus, who is it killing?" etc.
I would've thought fix / solution / tool / patch / antivirus routine would be better than 'cure'
I could be wrong though, I've been using PC's for 18years now and despite plenty of piracy I've never had a virus, so I've never had to cure one.
More likely, people running Linux don't automatically connect "server" with "big, fat machine, swallowing jiggawatts of power and operates only with liquid helium flowing around it".
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
which is an additional service that increases the latencies greatly in Xp pro and vista and up. ie, it can bring down a 400 ms world of warcraft connection to 120 ms ping in average case.
Read radical news here
This service is only needed if
a) You are on a LAN
b) Want to enable samba sharing
c) Want to share or use shared printer (not networked printers, printers hooked up to someones desktop)
But it was also the Romanians that managed to get the mainframe of their jail system infected with Downandup and the whole database was wiped out. At least that's how the media here reoprted it. "Luckily" there was a back-up plan. A very "old-school" back-up plan.
That's right. The back-up was on dead trees. So now they have put all that data in by hand.
Talk about a bipolar country.
inb4 Conficker evolves to evade and/or destroy this tool.
Seriously, there was already a fix pushed out for this. Conficker grew to overcome it, which is why the problem still exists today. There is no way this project is going to be this simple. These Romanians are in for a fight if they truly want to cure the Conficker epidemic.
Let q be a radix > 1. I am in ur base-q, killing 10 d00ds.
Funny enough most of my requests have been met with a financial excuse like, "we can't afford that." Seems that this is changing now that our CEO and CFO both have virii on their machines. I guess getting infected made the threat seem more real?
I thought "Snow Crash" was fiction ?
Its just a leftover from MS's war with Novel. Print servers and file servers were VERY (still are) common. Every desktop ships with the capability of sharing files both ways was very appealing to IT managers of the day. Instead of a VERY (at the time) expensive (and complex to use) Novel license and dedicated set of servers.
Back in the NT3.5/4/2000 days what was the diff between desktop (the pro ver) and server? A few registry bits.
Also back when I learned about servers and clients the prof would always draw the line back to itself on the server. Why? A server can be a 'client' even to itself. It is a subtle distinction.
So apparently no one has heard of ComboFix?
http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/combofix/how-to-use-combofix
Been disabled on my company laptop for three years running. I've only seen two things affected by disabling the server service - 1) I can't connect to my machine from another for file tranfer (works the other way around) and 2) Network administration cannont take control of my machine or access my hard drive ....sad
I think you're pushing people towards this site, or another like it.
I found BV's list years ago and it helped me turn off a lot of services that I didn't need. I was under the impression that my copy of WindowsXP was faster and more stable than other peoples'.
At least, it got to 7 years old without needing to be reformatted and reinstalled. Pretty good for Windows if you ask me.
I stopped using Windows a couple of years ago so it doesn't matter to me now, but for all those people that haven't gone Linux yet this site can help keep your box up a bit longer.
Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
From wikipedia: On 15 October 2008 Microsoft released a patch (MS08-067) to fix the vulnerability.[28] Removal tools are available from Microsoft,[29], BitDefender [30], ESET[31], Symantec[32], Sophos[33] and Kaspersky Lab while McAfee[34] can remove it with an On-Demand Scan.[35]"
You are terribly naive, grasshopper.
I wish someone would create a virus to attack and shut down online gaming - especially World of Warcraft. My wife does nothing else, and I'm thinking of divorcing her because of it.
The cure is to remove that American 'operating system'.
Want to hear the voice of GOD? cat
"Work" in what sense? They might capture MORE than 95% of the market?
Especially when you see so many .net remakes of the same function over and over again, from one
namespace to another, exactly doing the same thing, but with a different function name.
Hello,
Here is a list of Conficker removal programs:
BitDefender - http://www.bdtools.net/#
Enigma Software - http://www.enigmasoftware.com/conficker_removal_tool_more_info.php
ESET - http://www.eset.eu/encyclopaedia/conficker_anet_worm_kido_t_downadup_conficker_worm?lng=en
F-Secure - http://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/worm_w32_downadup_al.shtml
Kaspersky - http://support.kaspersky.com/wks6mp3/error?qid=208279973
McAfee - http://vil.nai.com/vil/stinger/default.aspx
Microsoft - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/890830
Symantec - http://www.symantec.com/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2009-011316-0247-99
Addition, most of these companies have online scanners you can run to detect and remove the worm. Oh, and in case you are wondering, I work for one of the abovementioned companies. So there.
Regards,
Aryeh Goretsky
Dexter is a good dog.
Uh, yse they did use it. They also re-branded it as something called "Windows Defender."
It handles RPC requests. That makes it a server.
Nothing in a desktop/workstation needs to be listening on a real network interface for RPC requests. Having it do that, especially on a network interface connected to the Internet, is a really bad idea.
Follow me
Better than you crazy Americans and your Lienux.
www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download
This gets old.
It is worth nothing more than a gratuitous +5 mod-up on Slashdot and a 0.83% share of the client desktop for Linux.
Time to dig deeper I think.
Cornflicker was dealt with in the January release of the Microsoft Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool
Deployment of the Microsoft Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool in an enterprise environment
"The Romanian security vendor said its removal tool will delete all versions of Downadup and will not be detected by the virus." .. Uhm well it got detected by /dot.
He is currently at 0, Troll. This is clearly mod abuse.
Give him at least a 1, underrated to undo the abuse.
I would've expect a white-hat to release a fix for the worm, via a worm itself.