Re: Code Red, Virus Growth, and some misunderstandings

From: Thomas Roessler (roessler@does-not-exist.org)
Date: Wed Aug 08 2001 - 04:43:02 PDT

  • Next message: Hoyt Plunkett: "RE: Code Red, ARP and YOU!!"

    On 2001-08-08 11:13:16 +0200, Patrick Oonk wrote:
    
    >http://www.security.nl/misc/codered-stats/
    
    Your code red II curve is indeed a bit weird...  This is most 
    probably due to the "locality" properties of Code Red II: You should 
    see a strong effect whenever it hits somewhere in your "/8" 
    neighborhood, and an even stronger effect when spreads in "your 
    /16".  That is, local measurements are likely to give biased results 
    with CR II.
    
    
    However, what I find much more interesting is the behaviour of your 
    Code Red I graph at the point at which CR II occurs.  Assuming that 
    the number of susceptible machines still changes slowly, this is 
    just the number of machines NOT infected with CR II.  Thus, if CR II 
    is following a logistic growth law, we should be seeing a logistic 
    curve turned on its head. 
    
    Let's fit some curves, see <http://www.does-not-exist.org/worm.png>; 
    these are based on your numbers: The first hours of worm growth are 
    described by a logistic curve (the blue dashed line).  Then, we see 
    some decay which is most likely due to users patching their hosts. 
    This is what we should expect.
    
    But then things get interesting: We can fit a logistic curve (the 
    pink dotted line) into the behaviour between (approximately) hours 
    96 and 114 (that is, August 4 between 0:00 and 18:00), but then the 
    behaviour of the CR I decay curve then turns exponential quite 
    suddenly (the dashed green line) - in a way which is certainly not 
    compatible with the current model.
    
    The reason for this is most likely the forcible reboot of CR II 
    servers after 24 hours.  That does, in particular, mean that the 
    first wave of CR II infections probably started at approximately 
    18:00 +0200 on August 3.
    
    Properly describing this behaviour with a mathematical model will be 
    a bit more tricky since this behaviour contains non-local effects 
    (that is, it depends on the history of the infection and not just on 
    the current number of infected hosts).
    
    -- 
    Thomas Roessler                        http://log.does-not-exist.org/
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service.
    For more information on this free incident handling, management 
    and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Aug 08 2001 - 11:08:46 PDT