Skip to content

CyberSecurity Institute

Security News Curated from across the world

Menu
Menu

Delivering the 12kb Bomb

Posted on April 6, 2004December 30, 2021 by admini

A young virus writer, sitting in his underwear in his parent’s dark basement, takes a hex editor and modifies a few bytes of the latest Netsky.M (16.5kb), Beagle.J (12kb) or Mydoom.G (20kb) mutation, spawns a new virus variant, and then releases it into the wild.

The resulting few thousand compromised machines, a conservative estimate perhaps, will sit naked as drones or “bots” on the Internet, waiting patiently for their summons and commands.

A mere 12 kilobytes of action-packed code is impressive.

For a 12 kilobyte Beagle, you get total system compromise, plus a highly effective spam engine.

The latest code that brings a Microsoft computer to its knees is small enough that it could be silk-screened onto an extra-large t-shirt: a walking time bomb, if you will.

With today’s monolithic software programs and operating systems, often barely fitting compressed on a CD-ROM, it’s easy to see how small bits of malicious code can slip under the radar.

I still remember the days, many computer-years ago now, when BackOrifice and SubSeven Trojans first came out.

At just over 100kb, they were impressive in their day.

Back then most people were running Windows 98, and a small 100kb email attachment could easily slip into the operating system and wreak havoc without ever being noticed.

Today these are 100kb Trojans are monolithic in comparison to our modern email-based worm-virus-backdoor-spam-engines that tend to be under 20kb; these old relics are still a useful footnote, however, for watching the long-term evolution of malicious code.

Speaking of monolithic: Windows XP Home Edition requires approximately 1,572,864 kilobytes (1.5Gbytes) for a typical install, according to Microsoft.

Of course, it’s better/faster/easier-to-use than previous versions, as the advertisements say, and if you believe the literature too it’s also less buggy and significantly more secure.

The public relations spin machine for such a large company is fascinating to me Windows has become bloated into millions and millions of lines code, yet it only takes a mere 12 kilobytes to provide full system compromise and an annoying spam engine.

The divide between David and Goliath has never been greater.

Consider an analogy on the size of modern malicious code: if Windows XP were the size of the Empire State Building, then the little barking Beagle virus – the size of a small dog – can come in through the front door, lift its leg, deliver its payload, and somehow cause the entire building to come crumbling down.

The latest craze in the virus-worm-spam war has seen computer worms crawling inside of other computer worms – like watching maggots crawl on top of each other as they make their way through a tender piece of meat.

Some of the latest worms found in the wild have multi-vector propagation algorithms and also make use of previous viral infections by Beagle and Mydoom.

I do not know to what extent Microsoft’s code is scrutinized through an exhaustive security audit, but two years after Bill Gates’ long-heralded announcement the holes in the cheese are larger than they’ve ever been.

For now we’re stuck with millions and millions of lines code compiled into a giant operating system that can be wiped out of existence remotely with nothing but a small 12 kilobyte piece of code, launched by someone in his underwear on the other side of the world.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/36345.html

Read more

Bridging the gap between security and developers

Posted on April 6, 2004December 30, 2021 by admini

Peter Wood, partner and chief of operations at First Base Technologies, said that because developers are not security professionals, their application development stresses functionality, not security, and there is a lack of awareness of security issues.

Application vulnerabilities occur, said Wood, because common coding techniques do not necessarily include security; input is assumed to be valid, but untested; and inappropriate file calls can reveal source code and system files.

To bring security to the development environment, said Wood, it is necessary to create and enforce secure coding practices, self-assess code during development, implement security checks into the quality assurance cycle and consider security during change control.

The challenge of achieving this in global organisations was addressed by Andy MacGovern, global security awareness manager at Reuters.

He said that security is often seen as a “hold up” in the product development lifecycle, where products have to be delivered faster in a climate of increased customer expectations, more complex products, reduced budgets, fewer resources and a tougher legislative environment.

Similarly, you should identify and adopt an appropriate security framework and develop policies appropriate to the organisation, said MacGovern.

Reuters has developed an extended practice that takes into account limited security resources, and aims to have two “streams”: replication of security consulting resources, and the development of so-called “security evangelists” – people who understand the need for security.

In his presentation, Stuart King, security consultant at Reed Elsevier, highlighted the most common vulnerabilities in corporate IT infrastructure: buffer overflow, web servers, database servers, cookie poisoning, parameter tampering, SQL injection and cross-site scripting.

http://www.microscope.co.uk/articles/article.asp?liArticleID=129648&liArticleTypeID=20&liCategoryID=2&liChannelID=22&liFlavourID=2&sSearch=&nPage=1

Read more

Forrester questions Linux security

Posted on April 5, 2004December 30, 2021 by admini

The report finds that on average, Linux distributors took longer than Microsoft to patch security holes, although Microsoft flaws tended to be more severe.

But leading Linux vendor Red Hat said that while Forrester’s underlying figures were sound, its conclusions didn’t give an accurate idea of relative security, as they failed to distinguish between patch times for critical updates and routine, obscure problems.

The report arrives in the midst of a fierce debate around the relative merits of Linux and Windows, and follows a number of reports perceived to have been slanted in Microsoft’s favor.

Last October, Forrester forbade its customers to publicize studies they had commissioned; it made the move partly because of criticism of a report from Forrester subsidiary Giga Research that found some companies saved money by developing with Windows rather than Linux.

A new tactic in that battle has been to compare how long it takes for various operating system vendors to patch flaws — the “days of risk” for each operating system.

Microsoft took on average 25 days to release a patch; Red Hat and Debian 57, SUSE 74 and MandrakeSoft 82, Forrester said.

“Microsoft’s average of 25 days between disclosure and release of a fix was the lowest of all the platform maintainers we evaluated,” wrote analyst Laura Koetzle in the report.

The figures Forrester uses for “all days of risk” are arrived at by averaging the number of days needed to fix a flaw, without distinguishing between critical flaws and harmless ones.

Thus, if a vendor took six months to patch a low-risk bug, it would make them appear to have a slow security response time overall, even if all critical bugs had been fixed instantly.

Using Microsoft’s own definition of a critical flaw as a bug which could allow a worm to propagate without user interaction, only 13 Red Hat vulnerabilities were critical during the one-year time period, and they took an average of just over a day to fix, Cox said.

http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php/id;554502920;fp;2;fpid;1

Read more

Sarb-Ox Offerings on the Rise

Posted on April 5, 2004December 30, 2021 by admini

With the first Sarbanes-Oxley Act compliance deadlines just seven months away, Microsoft Corp. and Oracle Corp. have introduced software to automate publicly held companies’ compliance processes. Microsoft’s Office Solution Accelerator for Sarbanes-Oxley, rolled out last week, provides best-practice guidelines and templates for documenting processes using Microsoft’s Windows SharePoint Services and…

Read more

Symantec Updates Enterprise Client Security Software

Posted on April 5, 2004December 30, 2021 by admini

Symantec on Monday introduced new client-side security software for the enterprise that borrows some tools and techniques from the company’s consumer line. Client Security integrates firewall, anti-virus, and intrusion detection defenses for desktops and laptops, then puts all the protected clients under control from a single management console. Its target:…

Read more

Insurers to drop hacking premiums

Posted on April 2, 2004December 30, 2021 by admini

Prices for hacking insurance are predicted to drop for some businesses as insurers begin to understand the market better.

Read more

Posts navigation

  • Previous
  • 1
  • …
  • 378
  • 379
  • 380
  • 381
  • 382
  • 383
  • 384
  • …
  • 421
  • Next

Recent Posts

  • AI/ML News – 2024-04-14
  • Incident Response and Security Operations -2024-04-14
  • CSO News – 2024-04-15
  • IT Security News – 2023-09-25
  • IT Security News – 2023-09-20

Archives

  • April 2024
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • September 2020
  • October 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • December 2018
  • April 2018
  • December 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • August 2014
  • March 2014
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • February 2012
  • October 2011
  • August 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003

Categories

  • AI-ML
  • Augment / Virtual Reality
  • Blogging
  • Cloud
  • DR/Crisis Response/Crisis Management
  • Editorial
  • Financial
  • Make You Smile
  • Malware
  • Mobility
  • Motor Industry
  • News
  • OTT Video
  • Pending Review
  • Personal
  • Product
  • Regulations
  • Secure
  • Security Industry News
  • Security Operations
  • Statistics
  • Threat Intel
  • Trends
  • Uncategorized
  • Warnings
  • WebSite News
  • Zero Trust

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
© 2025 CyberSecurity Institute | Powered by Superbs Personal Blog theme