mailing list archives
Re: Times up!
From: Brandon Enright <bmenrigh () ucsd edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 18:18:33 +0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:38:53 -0400 or thereabouts Dave Aitel
<dave () immunityinc com> wrote:
Is that exploit reliable? It doesn't look like it's using the reliable
variant (according to our very brief RE efforts here - and by "our", I
In my (also brief) testing, no, it isn't reliable.
Why would someone find such a cool exploit and then not make it
reliable? Does it even work on XP SP2/3?
I haven't been able to get it to go on SP2/3.
Here are a few other observations about the relative lack of
sophistication of the worm component:
* It appears to only scan the local segment
* It scans sequentially
* It scans with a 1 second delay between hosts
* Sometimes it scans a live host but for whatever reason does not
attempt to exploit
* When it does attempt to exploit a host, it follows up with a bunch of
HTTP to the C&C servers
I think the above shows a pattern of decisions by the author to *not* be
aggressive. I suspect the author was hoping to compromise just a
handful of machines and go unnoticed by the security community. As
currently written, this malware doesn't appear able to cause a mass
outbreak -- it's simply too slow and too unreliable.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Dailydave mailing list
Dailydave () lists immunitysec com
Re: Times up! Alexander Sotirov (Oct 24)
Re: Times up! Kostya Kortchinsky (Oct 24)