Need Worms and Viruses Category

[corkyg]

Viruses and worms affect the operating system - not hardware or forum issues. But = that does not seem readily apparent to Joe Sixpack with a computer - so how about a separate Category for Malware - include viruses, worms, spybots, etc.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Why not post it all over so Windows users can see it instead of putting it in one category most of the idiots will never go to?

 

[corkyg]

Whatever = but it sure ain't hardware - and if things get locked there for being out of category, then lock those also. 🙂 Life's too short to bend the rules for idiots.

 

[n0cmonkey]

If I didn't see hundreds of attempts for this and other stupid Windows-only, someone didn't bother to patch WEEKS ago when the patch came out, someone doesn't run antivirus because it lowers their FPS by 2, someone doesn't use a firewall because trading donkey porn on whatever p2p site is too hard crap hitting my firewall at home, I'd agree with you. But until users get smart enough to update their machines once in a while, I think those are necessary.

 

[corkyg]

I agree with what you say. I don't understand people not maintaining their systems at least weekly - that includes the weekly AV DAT file, and a monthly Windows Update. I am running SP2/RC1 at the present, and it des a very good job of that - and it lets ME control it - a non-full automatic option. So far no glitches at all.

I get my AV DAT file updated every Wednesday PM. It is a routine.

Cheers! 🙂

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

There should be a "sticky" forum where all the threads that get stickied get moved to so if people actually CARE about that crap, they don't have to screw up all the other forums with sh|tloads of stickies everywhere.

 

[MedicBob]

Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
There should be a "sticky" forum where all the threads that get stickied get moved to so if people actually CARE about that crap, they don't have to screw up all the other forums with sh|tloads of stickies everywhere.

that actually sound better the stickies all over the place.

 

[n0cmonkey]

If there is a stickies forum everyone will ignore it and no one will see the stickies.

 

[Medea]

I agree that there should be a separate forum. As to people who think that they won't have a problem if they update regularly, that may be the case sometimes - but there has to be a new worm and/or virus introduced into the wild before a patch is issued, and then a patch is created. Also, sometimes people have a hell of a time trying to get rid of it once their system gets infected before a patch comes out or even sometimes after one is issued.

Stickies are nice, but a separate forum would be better. It's not like we're getting hit with a worm or virus once in a while. These things are getting released more and more frequently, and people are getting hit with them more and more frequently.

Personally, I think it's a very good idea.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Medea
I agree that there should be a separate forum. As to people who think that they won't have a problem if they update regularly, that may be the case sometimes - but there has to be a new worm and/or virus introduced into the wild before a patch is issued, and then a patch is created. Also, sometimes people have a hell of a time trying to get rid of it once their system gets infected before a patch comes out or even sometimes after one is issued.

Do you know how ridiculous this sounds? It is blatantly wrong. If there is a source that is feeding you this drivel, please point it out so I can laugh.

Stickies are nice, but a separate forum would be better. It's not like we're getting hit with a worm or virus once in a while. These things are getting released more and more frequently, and people are getting hit with them more and more frequently.

Personally, I think it's a very good idea.

The stickies make sure the idiots in various forums would see the thread (even if they just see it because it annoys them to hit the space bar once). If there is a forum just for these things and the stickies go away, the idiots won't venture from <insert forum name here> to wade through the virus/worm forum to see what they should be doing.

 

[Medea]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Medea
I agree that there should be a separate forum. As to people who think that they won't have a problem if they update regularly, that may be the case sometimes - but there has to be a new worm and/or virus introduced into the wild before a patch is issued, and then a patch is created. Also, sometimes people have a hell of a time trying to get rid of it once their system gets infected before a patch comes out or even sometimes after one is issued.

Do you know how ridiculous this sounds? It is blatantly wrong. If there is a source that is feeding you this drivel, please point it out so I can laugh.

Stickies are nice, but a separate forum would be better. It's not like we're getting hit with a worm or virus once in a while. These things are getting released more and more frequently, and people are getting hit with them more and more frequently.

Personally, I think it's a very good idea.

The stickies make sure the idiots in various forums would see the thread (even if they just see it because it annoys them to hit the space bar once). If there is a forum just for these things and the stickies go away, the idiots won't venture from <insert forum name here> to wade through the virus/worm forum to see what they should be doing.

Why don't you do some research before you post ridiculous and assine replies? Ever hear of google?
A couple of examples (which weren't hard to find):

Witty worm proves patching 'not viable' - research
Robert Lemos
CNET News.com
March 29, 2004

Companies could not apply patches in time to prevent the Witty worm spreading, according to a report from US academics

The Witty worm first hit computers known to be vulnerable and emerged so quickly that most companies had no time to apply a patch, according a recent report by US-based academics.

The worm started spreading around the Internet last week, less than 48 hours after the first public description of the flaw was released. That's the fastest development to date of a worm from a vulnerability, according to a report published late last week by the Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analysis (CAIDA) and the University of California at San Diego.

"The fact that all victims were compromised via their firewall software the day after a vulnerability in that software was publicised indicates that the security model in which end users apply patches to plug security holes is not viable," the report stated.
<snipped>
Link

Viruses Tag Along
By Dennis Fisher
March 29, 2004
With vulnerability that lets them penetrate defenses.

Because each virus is unique, anti-virus products require new signatures to detect each one, even those that are simply variants of previous malware. Without the signatures, anti-virus software is essentially blind: Not only won't it be able to stop the virus, but it also won't even be able to alert the user that a virus may have come through.
<snipped>
Link

If a vulnerability is discovered - yeah, a patch usually can be released before any significant damage is done. That doesn't mean that some boxes get infected before the patch is released.

Did you ever hear of the word "logic"? Logically, there will be worms/viruses that will be released before an AV can release an update and/or a vulnerability that will be discovered before a patch can be released.

Go back to reading your comic books...

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Medea
Why don't you do some research before you post ridiculous and assine replies? Ever hear of google?
A couple of examples (which weren't hard to find):

Oooh one example. Witty was a dud.

Witty worm proves patching 'not viable' - research
Robert Lemos
CNET News.com
March 29, 2004

Companies could not apply patches in time to prevent the Witty worm spreading, according to a report from US academics

The Witty worm first hit computers known to be vulnerable and emerged so quickly that most companies had no time to apply a patch, according a recent report by US-based academics.

The worm started spreading around the Internet last week, less than 48 hours after the first public description of the flaw was released. That's the fastest development to date of a worm from a vulnerability, according to a report published late last week by the Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analysis (CAIDA) and the University of California at San Diego.

"The fact that all victims were compromised via their firewall software the day after a vulnerability in that software was publicised indicates that the security model in which end users apply patches to plug security holes is not viable," the report stated.
<snipped>
Link

Viruses Tag Along
By Dennis Fisher
March 29, 2004
With vulnerability that lets them penetrate defenses.

Because each virus is unique, anti-virus products require new signatures to detect each one, even those that are simply variants of previous malware. Without the signatures, anti-virus software is essentially blind: Not only won't it be able to stop the virus, but it also won't even be able to alert the user that a virus may have come through.
<snipped>
Link

If a vulnerability is discovered - yeah, a patch usually can be released before any significant damage is done. That doesn't mean that some boxes get infected before the patch is released.

Code red, Blaster, and this newest worm all had patches available weeks or months before the worms made it into the wild.

Did you ever hear of the word "logic"? Logically, there will be worms/viruses that will be released before an AV can release an update and/or a vulnerability that will be discovered before a patch can be released.

Yes, there will be. Have you looked at the latest big worms? They exploit known vulnerabilities.

Go back to reading your comic books...

The patch for code red was apparently released on June 18. The worm hit the news stands when? July.
The Blaster patch seems to have been released on July 16, 2003. The eEye Blaster worm analysis was released on August 11.
Sasser exploits hit the web in late April (securitylab's exploit was made public on April 29). The security bulletin was released by Microsoft when? That's right, April 13.

What is my point? First, they are 3 of the biggest worms in the recent past, not just a little worm that lasted a day (although the approach was quite interesting). It shows that the Witty worm was the exception, and hopefully it stays that way. Over all, the sasser, blaster, and code red worms were preventable.

And chances are the next one will be too, if people get their heads out of their asses and patch. "Logically" you plan for the majority. The majority of these things can be prevented. Education is the solution.

And thanks, I enjoy my comic books.

 

[compudog]

I'd have to go with n0cmonkey on this one. Most of this nonsense IS preventable. And each computer user is responsible. It shouldn't be up to the AT community or the Anti-Virus vendors to make sure the end-user is applying the patches. Sure MS has holes, but the patches are there, most of the time before the exploits.

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: Medea
The Witty worm first hit computers known to be vulnerable and emerged so quickly that most companies had no time to apply a patch, according a recent report by US-based academics.

Companies not patching in time is NOT the same as patches not being available in time.