Home page logo

dailydave logo Dailydave mailing list archives

Re: Times up!
From: Brandon Enright <bmenrigh () ucsd edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 18:18:33 +0000

Hash: SHA1

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
mean "Kostya's").

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.


Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

Dailydave mailing list
Dailydave () lists immunitysec com

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]