Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 122

Thread: Ping: Dustin Cook - How would *you* find this rootkit?

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    ~BD~ Guest

    Ping: Dustin Cook - How would *you* find this rootkit?

    One of the world's stealthiest pieces of malware infected more than 4.5
    million PCs in just three months, making it possible for its authors to
    force keyloggers, adware, and other malicious programs on the
    compromised machines at any time.



    'Indestructible' rootkit enslaves 4.5m PCs in 3 months


    The TDSS rootkit burst on the scene in 2008 and quickly earned the
    begrudging respect of security experts for its long list of highly
    advanced features. It is virtually undetectable by antivirus software,
    and its use of low-level instructions makes it extremely hard for
    researchers to conduct reconnaissance on it. A built-in encryption
    scheme prevents network monitoring tools from intercepting
    communications sent between control servers and infected machines.

    The latest TDL-4 version of the rootkit, which is used as a persistent
    backdoor to install other types of malware, infected 4.52 million
    machines in the first three months of this year, according to a detailed
    technical analysis published Wednesday by antivirus firm Kaspersky Lab.

    Additional changes include a new antivirus feature that rids
    TDSS-infected machines of 20 rival malware titles, including ZeuS, Gbot,
    and Optima. It also blacklists the addresses of command and control
    servers used by these competing programs to prevent them from working
    properly.

    Like the Popureb trojan and the Torpig botnet (aka Sinowal and Anserin),
    it also infects the master boot record of a compromised PC's hard drive,
    ensuring that malware is running even before Windows is loaded.

    Ref: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06...reon_advances/

    --
    Dave - I find the bit about riding infected machines of rival malware
    rather interesting. That's what I suggested a malware /cleaning/ product
    might do! How would one ever know it had happened?!!


  2. #2
    Mike Easter Guest

    Re: Ping: Dustin Cook - How would *you* find this rootkit?

    a.p.s only - no daft x-post to unrelated groups like a BD troll.

    ~BD~ wrote:

    > The latest TDL-4 version of the rootkit,


    The problems are/ start with/ detection. If you can detect a boot sector
    problem/condition, then you have to 'get rid of' - zero or perhaps
    replace - the boot sector which is followed by creation of a new boot
    sector and operating system.


    --
    Mike Easter

  3. #3
    ~BD~ Guest

    Re: Ping: Dustin Cook - How would *you* find this rootkit?

    Mike Easter wrote:
    > a.p.s only - no daft x-post to unrelated groups like a BD troll.


    Adding an additional 34 readers is hardly trolling!

    alt.politics.scorched-earth alt.politics.scorched-earth@googlegroups.com
    Language: English
    34 subscribers, Messages per month: 4267, Usenet

    http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?...ched-earth%2C&

    >
    > ~BD~ wrote:
    >
    >> The latest TDL-4 version of the rootkit,

    >
    > The problems are/ start with/ detection. If you can detect a boot sector
    > problem/condition, then you have to 'get rid of' - zero or perhaps
    > replace - the boot sector which is followed by creation of a new boot
    > sector and operating system.


    The problem, surely, is knowing why one *should* look for a problem in
    the first place! If all appears quite /normal/ to a computer user ...!!!

  4. #4
    Mike Easter Guest

    Re: Ping: Dustin Cook - How would *you* find this rootkit?

    ~BD~ wrote:
    > Mike Easter wrote:
    >> ~BD~ wrote:
    >>
    >>> The latest TDL-4 version of the rootkit,

    >>
    >> The problems are/ start with/ detection.


    > The problem, surely, is knowing why one *should* look for a problem
    > in the first place!


    Absolutely.

    This is not a trivial problem.


    And your newsreader is not making proper quote marks. Please correct
    your problem.

    --
    Mike Easter

  5. #5
    Bullwinkle. Guest

    Re: Ping: Dustin Cook - How would *you* find this rootkit?

    LOL You should practice what you preach.



    "Mike Easter" <MikeE@ster.invalid> wrote in message
    news:972n69Fte5U2@mid.individual.net...
    ~. Please correct
    your problem.

    Mike Easter


  6. #6
    Dustin Guest

    Re: Ping: Dustin Cook - How would *you* find this rootkit?

    ~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in
    news:iuh7me$rvc$1@dont-email.me:

    > The problem, surely, is knowing why one *should* look for a problem
    > in the first place! If all appears quite /normal/ to a computer user
    > ...!!!


    I'm not an average computer user. You're tilting at windmills, again.


    --
    (Hey) I keep on thinking that it's
    (Hey) all done and all over now (whoa)
    You keep on thinking you can save me save me
    (Hey) My ship is sinking but it's
    (Hey) all good and I can go down (whoa)
    You've got me thinking that the party's all over


  7. #7
    FromTheRafters Guest

    Re: Ping: Dustin Cook - How would *you* find this rootkit?

    "~BD~" <~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in message
    news:iuh7me$rvc$1@dont-email.me...
    > Mike Easter wrote:
    >> a.p.s only - no daft x-post to unrelated groups like a BD troll.

    >
    > Adding an additional 34 readers is hardly trolling!
    >
    > alt.politics.scorched-earth alt.politics.scorched-earth@googlegroups.com
    > Language: English
    > 34 subscribers, Messages per month: 4267, Usenet
    >
    > http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?...ched-earth%2C&
    >
    > >
    > > ~BD~ wrote:
    > >
    > >> The latest TDL-4 version of the rootkit,

    > >
    > > The problems are/ start with/ detection. If you can detect a boot sector
    > > problem/condition, then you have to 'get rid of' - zero or perhaps
    > > replace - the boot sector which is followed by creation of a new boot
    > > sector and operating system.

    >
    > The problem, surely, is knowing why one *should* look for a problem in the
    > first place! If all appears quite /normal/ to a computer user ...!!!


    That's true, but what's your point? Are you paving the way to slimey
    innuendo, or are you actually asking about detecting or identifying
    a rootkit?

    You're probably not going to find such a rootkit unless you suspect one is
    present, or you routinely check the startup axis code. The thing is, a rootkit
    will likely be hiding something else, and that something else *does something*,
    more than likely using networking. When network activity is noticed, and an
    investigation is conducted, it will be noticed that tools on the computer doing
    the nefarious communicating are not giving a complete picture. It is *that*
    that will cause one to suspect a rootkit.

    Detection can be a behavioral thing, but identification requires more. Once
    you suspect it is there, you inspect it from a clean environment to identify
    it and possibly repair/replace affected areas.

    If a certain paranoid fantasy about otherwise legitimate security software
    (antivirus/antimalware) installing rootkits were actually true, said rootkits
    would be discovered in short order by the behavior (activity) the programs
    that they hide engage in.



  8. #8
    Aardvark Guest

    Re: Ping: Dustin Cook - How would *you* find this rootkit?

    On Fri, 01 Jul 2011 06:40:55 -0400, FromTheRafters wrote:

    > If a certain paranoid fantasy about otherwise legitimate security
    > software (antivirus/antimalware) installing rootkits were actually true,
    > said rootkits would be discovered in short order by the behavior
    > (activity) the programs that they hide engage in.


    Yeah, but where would be the trolling fun for BD in accepting that fact?



    --
    "Those who do not make human beings the center of their concern soon
    lose the capacity to make any ethical choices, for they willingly
    sacrifice others in the name of the politically expedient and
    practical." - Dwight Macdonald, “The Root Is Man.”

  9. #9
    FromTheRafters Guest

    Re: Ping: Dustin Cook - How would *you* find this rootkit?


    "Aardvark" <aardvark@youllnever.know> wrote in message
    news:ZhjPp.27447$J65.1301@newsfe14.ams2...
    > On Fri, 01 Jul 2011 06:40:55 -0400, FromTheRafters wrote:
    >
    >> If a certain paranoid fantasy about otherwise legitimate security
    >> software (antivirus/antimalware) installing rootkits were actually true,
    >> said rootkits would be discovered in short order by the behavior
    >> (activity) the programs that they hide engage in.

    >
    > Yeah, but where would be the trolling fun for BD in accepting that fact?


    Surely he wouldn't let a little logic cloud his vision.



  10. #10
    ~BD~ Guest

    Re: Ping: Dustin Cook - How would *you* find this rootkit?

    FromTheRafters wrote:
    > "~BD~"<~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in message
    > news:iuh7me$rvc$1@dont-email.me...
    >> Mike Easter wrote:
    >>> a.p.s only - no daft x-post to unrelated groups like a BD troll.

    >>
    >> Adding an additional 34 readers is hardly trolling!
    >>
    >> alt.politics.scorched-earth alt.politics.scorched-earth@googlegroups.com
    >> Language: English
    >> 34 subscribers, Messages per month: 4267, Usenet
    >>
    >> http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?...ched-earth%2C&
    >>
    >>>
    >>> ~BD~ wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The latest TDL-4 version of the rootkit,
    >>>
    >>> The problems are/ start with/ detection. If you can detect a boot sector
    >>> problem/condition, then you have to 'get rid of' - zero or perhaps
    >>> replace - the boot sector which is followed by creation of a new boot
    >>> sector and operating system.

    >>
    >> The problem, surely, is knowing why one *should* look for a problem in the
    >> first place! If all appears quite /normal/ to a computer user ...!!!

    >
    > That's true, but what's your point? Are you paving the way to slimey
    > innuendo, or are you actually asking about detecting or identifying
    > a rootkit?


    The latter.

    > You're probably not going to find such a rootkit unless you suspect one is
    > present, or you routinely check the startup axis code. The thing is, a rootkit
    > will likely be hiding something else, and that something else *does something*,
    > more than likely using networking. When network activity is noticed, and an
    > investigation is conducted, it will be noticed that tools on the computer doing
    > the nefarious communicating are not giving a complete picture. It is *that*
    > that will cause one to suspect a rootkit.


    I suggest that the /average/ computer user would *not* notice any such
    network activity whilst his/her computer is carrying out the tasks
    demanded of it. (email, surfing etc)

    > Detection can be a behavioral thing, but identification requires more. Once
    > you suspect it is there, you inspect it from a clean environment to identify
    > it and possibly repair/replace affected areas.


    I agree.

    > If a certain paranoid fantasy (Edit: are you *sure?!!!) about otherwise legitimate security software
    > (antivirus/antimalware) installing rootkits were actually true, said rootkits
    > would be discovered in short order by the behavior (activity) the programs
    > that they hide engage in.


    Would you please expand on that premise?

    Who, exactly, will be looking for any unusual behaviour (activity)?

    Dave



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •