Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Security Unix IT Linux

New Mayhem Malware Targets Linux and UNIX-Like Servers 168

Bismillah writes: Russian security researchers have spotted a new malware named Mayhem that has spread to 1,400 or so Linux and FreeBSD servers around the world, and continues to look for new machines to infect. And, it doesn't need root to operate. "The malware can have different functionality depending on the type of plug-in downloaded to it by the botmaster in control, and stashed away in a hidden file system on the compromised server. Some of the plug-ins provide brute force cracking of password functionality, while others crawl web pages to scrape information. According to the researchers, Mayhem appears to be the continuation of the Fort Disco brute-force password cracking attack campaign that began in May 2013."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Mayhem Malware Targets Linux and UNIX-Like Servers

Comments Filter:
  • by dan_linder ( 84060 ) <dan&linder,org> on Friday July 18, 2014 @09:17AM (#47481845) Homepage
    From reading TFA, they mention some possible names:

    and drops a malicious shared object named 'libworker.so'

    or

    After that, the PHP dropper creates a shell script named '1.sh',

    And for each of those, they present some example contents that could be used to verify it is part of this infection.

  • Re:Derp (Score:5, Informative)

    by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Friday July 18, 2014 @09:21AM (#47481865) Journal
    It's difficult to rate-limit login attempts from a botnet. The attack pattern I see on my server is one IP making three login attempts, then another IP making three login attempts, and so on. I do rate limit (via temporary IP blocking) attempts from one IP, but it doesn't help much. Of course, they're all doing password-based login attempts and I disable password-based SSH logins for all Internet-connected machines...
  • by raymorris ( 2726007 ) on Friday July 18, 2014 @09:39AM (#47481993) Journal

    Most of what we see in the wild is caused by improperly written PHP scripts which don't validate their input and then use crud like fopen_url. That provides the crackers the METHOD to put files on the server and execute them. SuExec gives web visitors PERMISSION to ad and modify files.

    Unfortunately, the folks at Plesk didn't read the first paragraph of the SuExec documentation before deploying it by default, so hundreds of thousands of DIY web servers are running with SuExec. (SuExec means allow visitors to modify files, but don't allow other clients hosted on the same shared server to do so).

    What the Plesk and DirectAdmin folks should have read, from the Apache SuExec page:

            -----
            Used properly, this feature can reduce considerably the security risks involved with allowing users to develop and run
            private CGI or SSI programs. However, if suEXEC is improperly configured, it can cause any number of problems and
          possibly create new holes in your computer's security. If you aren't familiar with managing setuid root programs and the
            security issues they present, we highly recommend that you not consider using suEXEC.
            -----

    That last sentence bears repeatings. "If you aren't familiar with managing setuid root programs and the security issues they present, we highly recommend that you not consider using suEXEC." Plesk, and DirectAdmin - your customers are not familiar with managing setuid programs and the security issue, so they should not even CONSIDER running suexec, much less have that foisted on them as the default.

  • Re:Derp (Score:5, Informative)

    by Zero__Kelvin ( 151819 ) on Friday July 18, 2014 @10:32AM (#47482517) Homepage
    This virus doesn't attack Linux at all. It attacks PHP web applications. They could run on Linux or any other OS. The brute forcing is what the botnet does once it has a foothold on the machine in question, and has nothing to do with the attack vector.
  • Re:Derp (Score:3, Informative)

    by rgbatduke ( 1231380 ) <rgb@@@phy...duke...edu> on Friday July 18, 2014 @10:38AM (#47482593) Homepage

    Surely you must be joking. There have been Explorer bugs that went unpatched for six months. No operating system is immune and security flaws arising from bugs in code are an inevitable accompaniment to having code in the first place, especially complex code with lots of moving parts (some of them infrequently tested/visited), but Microsoft has historically been Macrosquishy when it comes to security and patches. LOTS of holes, and many of them (in the historical past) have taken a truly absurd amount of time to be patched, resulting in truly monumental penetration of trojans and viruses via superrating wounds like Outlook. I still get an average of one email message a day that makes it through my filters purporting to be from a correctly named friend or a relative and encouraging me to click on a misspelled link. You think those messages are arising from successful data-scraping via Linux malware or Apple malware or FreeBSD malware?

    Perhaps, driven by the need to actually compete with Apple and Linux (including Android) instead of resting on their monopolistic laurels, they have cleaned up their act somewhat over the last few releases of Windows, but on average over the last 10 or 15 years, certainly since the widespread adoption of apt and yum to auto-maintain Linux, the mean lifetime of a security hole in a Linux based system all the way out to user desktops has been around 24 hours -- a few hours to patch it and push it to the master distro servers, mirror it, and pull it with the next update. Microsoft hasn't even been able to acknowledge that a bug exists on that kind of time frame, let alone find the problem in the code, fix it, test it, and push it.

    If they are doing better now, good for them! However, look at the relative penetration of malware even today. Linux malware has a very hard time getting any sort of traction. Apple malware has a very hard time getting any sort of traction. Windows? It's all too easy to whine that it gets penetrated all the time because it is so popular and ubiquitous, except that nowadays it is neither.

    rgb

What is research but a blind date with knowledge? -- Will Harvey

Working...