On Tue, 25 Sep 2001 11:24:49 -0500, Tina Bird wrote: > According to Ryan Russell (who's been analyzing the > worm code), Nimda doesn't honor redirects - it just > checks the response it gets from a Web server to > determine whether or not the server is vulnerable. > It doesn't follow redirects. So what does this > actually accomplish? Actually, I'm not sure it accomplishes anything. I read the post saying that redirecting Nimda to 127.0.0.1 killed it or slowed it down, and I wrote and posted my redirection tool before I spent a lot of time watching Nimda's reaction to it. Now that I've let it run overnight, I'm convinced that it doesn't do any good. Nimda traffic on my machine has actually gone up, because now it doesn't stop--it just keeps pounding on me, gleefully ignorning the redirects. I've gotten about 1.44 HTTP connections per minute in the past six hours, primarily from two persistent machines, whereas yesterday, before I had written my tool, I got about 0.391 connections per minute spread out among a half-dozen or so machines. Since none of this is legitimate traffic (my machine hasn't run a web server in half a year), for machines that don't run web servers it's clearly less effective to send redirects than to simply refuse connections. I suspect that the same is true for web servers, as well. -- Kyle R. Hofmann <krhat_private> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 : Tue Sep 25 2001 - 13:22:08 PDT