RE: CRIME FW: @Stake pulls pin on Geer: Effect on research and pu blication (fwd)

From: Kuo, Jimmy (Jimmy_Kuo@private)
Date: Fri Oct 03 2003 - 23:23:42 PDT

  • Next message: Crispin Cowan: "Re: CRIME FW: @Stake pulls pin on Geer: Effect on research and pu blication (fwd)"

    >>>Like Code Red, Nimda, Sapphire, and Blaster, each of which were 
    >>>capable of wiping out most Windows systems, and did. Seems like a 
    >>>pretty credible claim.
    
    >>But they didn't! You proved my point. Code Red, Nimda, Blaster, etc. all
    >>had the ability to wipe out the Internet and grind every machine to a
    >>halt. But they didn't. Code Red was probably the worst and it hit maybe
    >>25% of the Windows machines. Why?  Again - third party mechanisms
    >>(anti-virus, firewalls, intrusion prevention systems, etc.) contained
    >>that spread. Normalcy was restored within hours. 
    
    >So the diversity that Geer et al say we need to preserve worked.
    
    How many Windows machines are there?  Yet these named viruses each hit a
    couple hundred thousand or maybe up to a half million machines.  I don't
    know about you, but my definition of "most" requires at least a half.
    
    >>>When the August NE American blackout happened, there was a
    >>>significant report of some of the power grid being controlled by 
    >>>a Windows RPC DCOM system, which is precisely the Windows component 
    >>>that Blaster exploited. This may not have been the proximate cause 
    >>>of the blackout, but there's essentially no reason why it could not 
    >>>have been.
    
    >>Yes I have heard the same thing too.  That situation could have been
    >>easily and painlessly mitigated with effective AV,
    
    >How could AV possibly have mitigated a server worm like Blaster? How 
    >could *any* signature-based defense defend against a fast spreading worm
    >that hits your machines faster than any AV company can distribute an 
    >update? This was the point of Staniford et al's Warhol Worm paper 
    ><http://www.vnunet.com/News/1132084>: that worms can spread across the 
    >entire Internet in minutes, far faster than AV vendors can get a new 
    >signature out.
    
    Crispin, I will thank you not to make speeches on AV technology.
    
    McAfee's VirusScan detected Blaster as "Exploit-DcomRpc" using DATs released
    the previous week.  (Similarly, Nachi/Welchia.)  You will find that most of
    the articles about networks that got taken down referred to the Blaster
    and/or Welchia virus.  The interesting thing about that...  McAfee's names
    for the same two are Lovsan and Nachi.  Symantec's name for those two are...
    Blaster and Welchia.  :-)
    
    Jimmy
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Oct 04 2003 - 00:16:12 PDT