mailing list archives
Re: Malware detection
From: Vic Vandal <vvandal () well com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 07:53:58 -0700 (PDT)
No argument that the MS product may be difficult to attack through said methods, but the reason they built a CPU usage
meter for later versions is that early versions brought many machines to their knees (with or without competing
products being loaded on the same machines). Also users should be wary of the Spynet component and what it shares with
Microsoft from your machine data. And finally the MS product didn't exactly bubble up to the top in product tests this
year in detecting brand new malware, which is certainly the bane of many corporate InfoSec pros these days.
Coming in 13th in a field of 17 products isn't anything to brag about after all.
Also no argument here in that Trend is also a resource hog. Nearly a decade ago I used to tout that product for being
efficient, having excellent coverage, and for speedy turnaround with new signatures based on new malware submissions
(in comparison to some other vendors that sometimes took days to provide analysis and protection signatures). Then
they turned their AV product into a protection suite of desktop security products, which also took many machines to
their knees. They fixed some of the early performance issues, but once a vendor gets a bad rep in corporate
environments it's hard to re-establish trust.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeffrey Walton" <noloader () gmail com>
To: "Vic Vandal" <vvandal () well com>
Cc: security-basics () securityfocus com
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 9:31:51 AM
Subject: Re: Malware detection
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:31 AM, Vic Vandal <vvandal () well com> wrote:
Quotes and responses:
In closing, MS Security Essentials is not your best bet for identifying and defeating said malware.
Interestingly, Security Essentials has one of the better architectures
with respect to ipc and process counts. For example, MSSE generally
uses two processes (1 userland, 1 privileged) and has a minimal amount
of handles shared between the two). It makes it difficult to attack
the privileged component through userland via shared handles (Events,
Mutexes, File, etc).
Other AV, such as TrendMicro or McAfee, can have 8, 10, or 12
processes in a system, and handle sharing was like an orgy. We found
it very easy to attack privileged components through shared handles.
For example, we would accidentally shut down the firewall and update
service while testing the scanner.
----- Original Message -----
From: Savvy95 () gmail com
To: security-basics () securityfocus com
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2012 6:50:44 AM
Subject: Re: Re: Malware detection
My 2 cents.....
If you are not looking for a "large robust solution" and you have Windows, try a mixed solution of Microsoft Windows
Security Essentials for servers and workstations to detect and eliminate,
Windows inherent AppLocker for Windows 2008/Windows 7/Vista for whitelisting authorized apps.
For Windows XP, try Microsoft SteadyState to "freeze" the machine configuration and any changes are automaticallly
removed on reboot. Note: It's been discontinued since 2011 and support for XP will be too in the near future.
I hope you don't have Windows 98/ME/NT/2000 in your environment as there is no hope for you. ;-)
Applocker (How to Guide): http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd723686(v=WS.10).aspx
SteadyState (search for the download) there is also a reference document for all settings in SteadyState here:
You could use Microsoft System Center to what you want and more.
CISSP, ITIL, CEH, MCT
Securing Apache Web Server with thawte Digital Certificate
In this guide we examine the importance of Apache-SSL and who needs an SSL certificate. We look at how SSL works, how
it benefits your company and how your customers can tell if a site is secure. You will find out how to test, purchase,
install and use a thawte Digital Certificate on your Apache web server. Throughout, best practices for set-up are
highlighted to help you ensure efficient ongoing management of your encryption keys and digital certificates.
Re: RE: Malware detection kartik . netsec (Jul 25)
- Re: Malware detection, (continued)