mailing list archives
Re: mac trojan in-the-wild
From: Jay Sulzberger <jays () panix com>
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 22:29:14 -0400 (EDT)
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Thor (Hammer of God) <thor () hammerofgod com> wrote:
That's an interesting figure (86% that is). Can you give us some
insight into what you define as "user interaction"?
If it is clicking a link or reading an HTML email, then OK. If it is
opening an .exe from an email, I'd like to see what client you are
talking about and what environment (meaning, what OS/email client and
what did they have to do to get it to run). But specifically, how many
were exploits where a user had to visit an untrusted site, download an
executable, run it, and explicitly give it administrative credentials to
run? Not just people running as administrator, but typing in the admin
account credentials to run it as administrator as one has to do on OSX?
My guess (and I'd really like to see details on your findings) is that
most "interactive" issues are the more "trivial" interactive issues
(like clicking a link and launching a vulnerable version of IE).
But more importantly, let's look at things from the other side. Let's
say I'm wrong, and that Gadi is right on target with his "hit hard"
prediction and that we should be very concerned with this. Given the
requirements here, that again being flagrant ignorance where all the
above steps are executed (including the explicit admin part)-- what
exactly are we supposed to do? If people are willing and able to go
through the motions above what can we as security people do to prevent
it? Far too many people in this industry are far too quick to point out
how desperate the situation is at all turns, but I don't see many people
offering real solutions. But you know, I have to say... If we are
really going to consider this "serious," and we are really going to
define part of our jobs as being responsible for stopping people who
have absolutely no concerns for what they do and are willing to enter
their admin credentials into any box that asks for it, then I'd say that
there is a *serious* misunderstanding about what security is, and what
can be done about it-- either that, or I'm just in the wrong business.
Put in a better system of permissions. Use rolling backup. Have
independent system activity watchers. These measures are just
the first moves.
Unix was not designed to be resistant to one million hostile
actions per day by thousands of unknown attacking entities. But
if you run standard Unix and you have a Net connection, that is
what your Unix instance is exposed to.
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/