Slashdot Mirror


Researchers Take Down a Spam Botnet

The Register is reporting on the takedown of a botnet once responsible for 1/3 of the world's spam. The deed was done by researchers from the security firm FireEye, who detailed the action in a series of blog posts. PC World's coverage estimates that lately the botnet has accounted for 4% of spam. From the Register: "After carefully analyzing the machinations of the massive botnet, alternately known as Mega-D and Ozdok, the FireEye employees last week launched a coordinated blitz on dozens of its command and control channels. ... Almost immediately, the spam stopped, according to M86 Security blog. ... The body blow is good news to ISPs that are forced to choke on the torrent of spam sent out by the pesky botnet. But because many email servers already deployed blacklists that filtered emails sent from IP addresses known to be used by Ozdok, end users may not notice much of a change. ... With [the] head chopped off of Ozdok, more than 264,000 IP addresses were found reporting to sinkholes under FireEye's control..."

5 of 207 comments (clear)

  1. Wrong title, not 'taken down' by RichardDeVries · · Score: 5, Interesting
    From TFA:

    Only two command server were found to be located outside the USA. So does it mean that shutting these servers down would result in a complete botnet shut down? Keeping in view Ozdok's multi layered fallback mechanism the answer here is 'no'.

    and

    After seeing all these fallback mechanisms, it doesn't look very easy to kill Ozdok in one go but hurting this beast might not be that difficult.

    --
    Error 001
    Security Scan and Virus Detection do not work with your operating system.
  2. Re:Any more? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Eh, depends what you're looking at. Other Botnets have been taken down, usually by physically arresting the hacker who started it. I'm sure that they've tried to stop other Spam Botnets before. They didn't actually STOP Ozdok, they just dented it a bit.

    It's difficult to track how these things start because essentially you've got about a million breadcrumbs to go through.

    Lets say you've got 3 computers, A, B, and C. A infects B, B infects C. There is no direct correlation between A and C, so you have to work your way all the way up the chain. Now imagine you've got a million infected PC's. Who infected who? How do you work your way backwards? There's lots of ways to do this, most simple of which is to look at the contacts and determine which of the contacts is infected. Then determine the time and date of which the infection occured (Date Modified/Date Created on the file). Whoever was first was who infected the others.

    The problem with killing it is that it has a "multi layered fallback mechanism" - which is a fancy way of saying it replicates itself. It can do this by either having a secondary program or script copy itself back onto the infected PC when it detects the original infection is gone, or it can do this by RE-infecting any of the computers it was sent to infect in the first place.

    I hope thats enough to make you stagger and wonder exactly how much damage they could have possibly done to this botnet.

  3. Re:And meanwhile... by somersault · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Spam isn't so much an economics problem as a "some people are just dicks" problem. A lot of the problem with spam is the current system we use for email. It was never intended for such widespread use and has little-to-none in the way of authentication or security measures. You can encrypt emails for security sure, but it doesn't help get around the problem of spam..

    --
    which is totally what she said
  4. Re:good work by Lennie · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You obviously don't work for an ISP, we have to drop SMTP-connections on everything which looks to much like a bot just because of the large number of connection that we get, so we're able to have the legit connections and because scanning all the content would just be to much to handle.

    You would be amazed at the volumes of e-mail ISP's get. More then 98% of it is crap you don't want to receive.

    --
    New things are always on the horizon
  5. Re:What OS? by tokul · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What's the Windows OS percentage of that botnet?

    http://www.symantec.com/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2008-021215-0628-99
    100%, minus controllers, that might run on any OS