Discovery of Cyber Weapon by Kaspersky Labs
- Thread starter wayliff
- Start date
blackangst1
Lifer
- Feb 23, 2005
- 22,902
- 2,359
- 126
More FUD from the antivirus industry. What makes "Flame" a cyber weapon?
Looks like what we used to call malware. According to the article, it spreads like malware and acts like malware. Other than its media coverage, what makes this different than traditional malware?
Cyber weapon? Cyber FUD seems more like it.
Uno
Looks like what we used to call malware. According to the article, it spreads like malware and acts like malware. Other than its media coverage, what makes this different than traditional malware?
Cyber weapon? Cyber FUD seems more like it.
Uno
It is believed to be targeted at specific nations and created by a nation specifically for espionage. Have you heard of Stuxnet?
Cyber Espionage, Cyber Warfare, etc are legitimate terms...not FUD.
According to Peter Sommer and the OECD:
"A true cyberwar is an event with the characteristics of conventional war but fought exclusively in cyberspace."
Nothing that Flame does, or can do, amounts to an act of war.
Calling Flame a cyber weapon is not helpful. One of the problems sited by Sommer's is:
"... the lack of agreement on terminology and the use of exaggerated language."
From my perspective, anyone that lets their users download and install 20 MB worth of malware, like Flame, is likely to have a problem. I'll call that a malware problem.
If you want to call it something different, that is your prerogative.
But when you start using terms like cyber war and cyber weapon, I'll call it FUD.
Uno
"A true cyberwar is an event with the characteristics of conventional war but fought exclusively in cyberspace."
Nothing that Flame does, or can do, amounts to an act of war.
Calling Flame a cyber weapon is not helpful. One of the problems sited by Sommer's is:
"... the lack of agreement on terminology and the use of exaggerated language."
From my perspective, anyone that lets their users download and install 20 MB worth of malware, like Flame, is likely to have a problem. I'll call that a malware problem.
If you want to call it something different, that is your prerogative.
But when you start using terms like cyber war and cyber weapon, I'll call it FUD.
Uno
It's not new news, as it appears to be a variant that's been around for a couple years and has just been morphed again to avoid detection. But to call it FUD does it a dis-service. I would look up what FUD means. Its real and stealing real data.
It's verified Malware causing an issue, and the rise of multi purpuse sophisticated malware is not business as usual. Complex Malware that shows coordination and project management traits are not to be taken lightly, and is more evidence that organized groups (crime or nations) are increasing the use of these packages.
What i don't like is the whole rush to be the first to discover some new variant, rather than fixing an entire industry that has become virtually ineffective. AV is maybe 20% effective now. You cant go without it, but its also no longer the safety net it once was.
We need to move away from signature based detection AS FAST AS POSSIBLE. and BYOD (bring your own device) can Ki$$ my A$$.. to think that I should now have to secure a network that will allow devices to connect to it that I have no admin control over. A ridiculous request. No... you may not bring in that infected hump of crap you call a laptop into my network and access corporate assets.
Think of BYOD then tell me flame, old or not, is FUD...
Agreed that malware is bad. And there seems to be some agreement that neither state sponsored malware nor 'Flame" is new.
But isn't state sponsored malware what a state intelligence agency is expected to do? And aren't these efforts simply an outgrowth of older 'Communications Intelligence Activities' which in turn are outgrowths of the even older 'Black Chambers.'
Admittedly, if you were one of the five people in Egypt, or ten people in Saudia Arabia, that got infected by Flame, you have probably have had better days. But does that really make this situation a global crisis? Note that infections have also been reported in four other countries. (Link to Kaspersky map.)
So why all of the weeping and nashing of teeth over a few hundred computers getting infected with what is reportedly an old and bloated piece of malware that may have been created by a state agency?
My perception is that much of this publicity comes from companies (antivirus companies, defense contractors, and related groups) that think if they spread enough Fear, Uncertainy, and Doubt (FUD) that they can make some big money.
Note, I'm not saying the Flame is FUD. I'm saying that all of the publicity about cyber war and cyber weapons surrounding Flame is FUD. For example, consider that all that publicity creates a context where real vulnerabilities related to things like BYOD are more likely to be overlooked.
No problems if you think differently, but from my point of view all that press looks like a giant Chicken Little game. And I call that FUD.
Uno
But isn't state sponsored malware what a state intelligence agency is expected to do? And aren't these efforts simply an outgrowth of older 'Communications Intelligence Activities' which in turn are outgrowths of the even older 'Black Chambers.'
Admittedly, if you were one of the five people in Egypt, or ten people in Saudia Arabia, that got infected by Flame, you have probably have had better days. But does that really make this situation a global crisis? Note that infections have also been reported in four other countries. (Link to Kaspersky map.)
So why all of the weeping and nashing of teeth over a few hundred computers getting infected with what is reportedly an old and bloated piece of malware that may have been created by a state agency?
My perception is that much of this publicity comes from companies (antivirus companies, defense contractors, and related groups) that think if they spread enough Fear, Uncertainy, and Doubt (FUD) that they can make some big money.
Note, I'm not saying the Flame is FUD. I'm saying that all of the publicity about cyber war and cyber weapons surrounding Flame is FUD. For example, consider that all that publicity creates a context where real vulnerabilities related to things like BYOD are more likely to be overlooked.
No problems if you think differently, but from my point of view all that press looks like a giant Chicken Little game. And I call that FUD.
Uno
Chiefcrowe
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2008
- 5,056
- 199
- 116
Pretty crazy!!!
just saw this!
Microsoft certificate used to sign Flame malware, issues warning
https://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/microsoft-certificate-used-to-sign-flame-malware-issues-warning/78980
just saw this!
Microsoft certificate used to sign Flame malware, issues warning
https://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/microsoft-certificate-used-to-sign-flame-malware-issues-warning/78980
Chiefcrowe
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2008
- 5,056
- 199
- 116
Chiefcrowe
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2008
- 5,056
- 199
- 116
Flame malware hijacks Windows Update to spread from PC to PC
http://arstechnica.com/security/2012/06/flame-malware-hijacks-windows-update-to-propogate/
http://arstechnica.com/security/2012/06/flame-malware-hijacks-windows-update-to-propogate/
shortylickens
No Lifer
- Jul 15, 2003
- 80,287
- 17,082
- 136
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter