{"id":2316,"date":"2003-12-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-12-11T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2003\/12\/11\/yet-another-worm-posing-as-a-microsoft-patch-is-released\/"},"modified":"2021-12-30T11:41:04","modified_gmt":"2021-12-30T11:41:04","slug":"yet-another-worm-posing-as-a-microsoft-patch-is-released","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2003\/12\/11\/yet-another-worm-posing-as-a-microsoft-patch-is-released\/","title":{"rendered":"Yet Another Worm Posing as a Microsoft Patch is Released."},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Another Windows worm has begun to spread, posing as a security patch from Microsoft, a fix for the Blaster worm or a crack for a porn website.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Anti-virus company Sophos said the worm, which it had christened W32\/Yaha-Y, spread via network shares and email.  Emails sent by the worm were randomly selected from a list contained inside the worm.<\/p>\n<p>Computer Associates&#8217; analysis of the worm showed that its payload modified the lmhosts file on an infected computer to block access to symantec.com, microsoft.com, sophos.com, avp.ch, mcafee.com trendmicro.com, pandasoftware.com, www3.ca.com and ca.com &#8211; all anti-virus companies&#8217; sites, apart from Microsoft.  It appears from the code that the author also intended to install a key-logging trojan [email]anyuser@yahoo.com.txt[\/email] in the cookies folder of affected machines.<\/p>\n<p>As with previous Yaha variants, the worm may also attempt Denial of Service attacks against these targets: pakrail.com, paic.com.pk, jamaat.org, kse.net.pk and pak.gov.pk.<\/p>\n<p>More info: [url=http:\/\/www.smh.com.au\/articles\/2003\/12\/11\/1071086178204.html]http:\/\/www.smh.com.au\/articles\/2003\/12\/11\/1071086178204.html[\/url]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2316","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-warnings"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2316","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2316"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2316\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4803,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2316\/revisions\/4803"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2316"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2316"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2316"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}