RE: WORM_MIMAIL.A Anyone have any info on what this does yet?

From: James C. Slora, Jr. (Jim.Sloraat_private)
Date: Tue Aug 05 2003 - 13:15:36 PDT

  • Next message: Ramsinghani, Aashish (EM, GECIS): "RE: Question for all"

    Thanks - I see the same in additional copies that arrived yesterday. It
    does look like the worm favors high-weight servers, whether by design or
    by mistake. Not a single one has come to the primary mail server.
    
    
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: att13543 [mailto:skidat_private]
    > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 1:26 PM
    > To: James C. Slora, Jr.; incidentsat_private
    > Subject: RE: WORM_MIMAIL.A Anyone have any info on what this does yet?
    > 
    > 
    > Seems like the behavior is pretty much universal.  Since the posting,
    > I've received two messages through the low weight / primary 
    > mail server;
    > however, they were in quarantine.  Thinking they might be the original
    > spam message, I checked the SMTP header and found out they 
    > were actually
    > forwarded from a user's outside account.  I should have known, the
    > sender wasn't admin@[domain.com].
    > 
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: James C. Slora, Jr. [mailto:Jim.Sloraat_private] 
    > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 11:56 AM
    > To: att13543
    > Subject: RE: WORM_MIMAIL.A Anyone have any info on what this does yet?
    > 
    > att13543 wrote Monday, August 04, 2003 9:54 AM
    > 
    > > I'd be interested if anyone can correlate what I've seen:  we have 2
    > MX
    > > records, one weighted at 10 (primary) and one at 20 (secondary).  Of
    > the
    > > 200 or so MiMail's we've seen 100% have come through our SECONDARY
    > mail
    > > server.  Maybe the SMTP engine was written poorly, or maybe it was
    > this
    > > way on purpose?
    > 
    > All of ours were sent to one specific mail server that is way down the
    > priority list.
    > 
    > This matches previous spammed email malware patterns, and I cannot
    > recall any previous worm that looked up all the mail servers and used
    > the lowest-priority one. I'm guessing that the ones we have received
    > were sent by the worm distributors rather than from infected machines.
    > I've dropped them all before the full headers were delivered, 
    > so I don't
    > have any way to positively verify this theory.
    > 
    > AV vendor descriptions say the worm takes SMTP server info from the
    > infected computer, which is inconsistent with copies arriving 
    > through a
    > low-priority mail server that user are not aware of.
    > 
    > Has anyone examined the message headers to see if there is a 
    > detectable
    > difference between messages coming from an infected system and those
    > spammed by the worm author?
    > 
    > 
    
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Aug 05 2003 - 15:55:17 PDT