{"id":496,"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\/flaw-could-unleash-another-slammer\/"},"modified":"2021-12-30T11:37:29","modified_gmt":"2021-12-30T11:37:29","slug":"flaw-could-unleash-another-slammer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2003\/12\/11\/flaw-could-unleash-another-slammer\/","title":{"rendered":"Flaw could unleash another Slammer"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>A research company warned Tuesday that an attacker could use a recently patched Microsoft flaw to create a fast-moving worm similar to SQL Slammer, which spread rapidly across the Internet a year ago.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Core Security Technologies discovered that the Windows Workstation vulnerability announced by Microsoft last month could be exploited using the same type of data used by the SQL Slammer worm to spread across the Internet in just minutes.  &#8220;We believe these new attack vectors make the vulnerability even more dangerous and critical as the proposed workarounds are not sufficient to close them and particularly because they outline a very plausible scenario for a highly efficient worm,&#8221; Ivan Arce, chief technology officer for security software maker Core Security Technologies, wrote in an e-mail to CNET News.com.<\/p>\n<p>The company&#8217;s report also found that flaws in the Windows Messenger service, which allowed the MSBlast worm to spread this summer, could be exploited using the same &#8220;fire-and-forget&#8221; user datagram protocol (UDP) packets.<\/p>\n<p>Core ST acknowledged that the patches will prevent the attacks and also urged people to apply the fixes.<\/p>\n<p>More info: [url=http:\/\/zdnet.com.com\/2100-1105_2-5118580.html]http:\/\/zdnet.com.com\/2100-1105_2-5118580.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":[29],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-496","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/496","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=496"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/496\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2983,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/496\/revisions\/2983"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=496"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=496"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=496"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}