Re: CodeGreen beta release (idq-patcher/antiCodeRed/etc.)

From: DerHexXerat_private
Date: Wed Sep 05 2001 - 06:56:01 PDT

  • Next message: Markus Kern: "Re: CodeGreen beta release (idq-patcher/antiCodeRed/etc.)"

    @Markus Kern:
    Thank you for sharing this great piece of code ...
    ... it actually is a great solution (a much better one than mine) for the
    problem i was addressing.
    Let me resume what your code does:
    
    Host [A] is compromised by CodeRedI/II.
    Host [B] has your CRclean.dll isapi-filter installed (either installed by
    user or automated).
    
    Host [A] sends out exploit plus CodeRed to random addresses and hits Host
    [B].
    Host [B] counters this infection attempt by sending it's own exploit
    (CRclean.asm).
    * Host [A] downloads CRclean.dll from Host [B]
    * Host [A] executes CRclean.dll via rundll32 (func 'run') with system
    privileges.
    This is what happens then: (we are now in func 'run' from CRclean.dll.)
    * determines OS version
    * load needed dlls
    * download and apply patch (determine lang, dl patch, execute it, terminate
    hotfix.exe, cleanup tempdir)
    * remove CRII (delete explorer.exe, remove root.exe, reenable
    fileprotection, cleanup registry [mapping backdoors])
    * add CRclean.dll isapi-filter (registry)
    * restart iis (iisrestart.exe /restart /timeout:30)
    
    After new filter is installed, Host [A] will join the fight against CodeRed.
    
    Again ... this is a great solution, but
    I think that there are several problems in your code:
    a) rundll32 is called with system privileges. I had some problems while
    accessing the registry with system privileges. It might be possible that CRclean
    is not able to install itself as a new filter.
    b) If on Host [A] one of the CRII explorer.exe backdoors is running, this
    file can't be deleted (and can't be terminated via TerminateProcess
    [GetLastError: 5 (access denied)]).
    
    The main problem (isapi-filter bufferoverrun vulnerability) is solved, but
    there still remain the backdoors CRII injected on many systems. You should
    test your code under "in-the-wild" conditions.
    
    
    
    @Stanley Bubrouski:
    >Another worm...lovely...
    do you know how hard it is, to write such a worm?
    
    >Why not just flee the country?
    Well ... i can't remember when i have commited a crime (did I?)
    Anyways ... i am enjoying my holidays.
    
    >Great.  A lack of responsibility is the cornerstone to microsoft's terms
    of service, why should anyone expect any higher of it's users.
    
    Should i go out yelling "hey i have written a worm that might take bandwidth
    and could render systems useless. i will take all the resonability?" ???
    
    >Tell that to the kids who unleash this and eat up ...
    
    There is something you might have not considered: what happens if someone
    uses this vulnerability plus the backdoors CRII injected to spread code that
    performs dDoS attacks?
    
    >How about making a tool that patches machines and isn't a worm?
    Such a tool already exists ... let me remember ... microsoft has produced it
    ... oh yeah it's called patch -).
    
    Sorry ... but you should visit focus-virus, if you want to flame some
    authors.
    
    
    Bye,
    Der HexXer.
    
    -- 
    GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet.
    http://www.gmx.net
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Sep 05 2001 - 08:30:28 PDT