Clock Ticking for Nyxem Virus 72
DoddyUK writes "The BBC is reporting that the countdown has begun for the Nyxem virus. On February 3rd, common documents such as MS Word, Excel or Powerpoint will be overwritten on infected machines. Over 300,000 machines have been infected thus far, the main method of infection being the promise of porn in unsolicited emails."
May I be the first to say: (Score:1, Funny)
Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:3, Insightful)
From TFA: Honestly, are there still computer users out there...even regular users...who don't know this is a bad idea by now???
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:2, Funny)
Unfortunately... (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Melissa didn't do it.
Love didn't do it
MyDoom didn't do it.
Why do you think this will?
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:1)
300k is a lot of people but what percentage of total users is that?
Never mind... It's actually a percentage of users who;
1) have an ISP that doesn't block obviously infected attachments.
2) don't have anti virus software running on their machines.
Thats more idiots that I had hoped.
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:2)
Heck, even simply blocking all of the usual suspect attachment types (PIF, SCR, VBS, etc.) at the mail gateway is a big step forward.
Our company blocks about 20-25 different attachment types at the gateway, which means we have a drastically smaller exposure risk. It also means we're not soley dependent on anti-virus at the client level or users who are smart enough not to do something stupid.
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:1)
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:2)
I was trying to get a joke that could be read as more of a jibe over politics as a whole rather than any particular entity.
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:2)
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:1, Redundant)
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:1, Troll)
What is really annoying is that LURQH are keeping the infection list secret. It would have made a wonderful blacklist for an antispam system.
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:2)
Are you sure? ISC has been sending out notifications [sans.org] about "Blackworm" (Nyxem) infected PCs for a few days, so the list is definitely available to to the security community. It would be fairly logical that Spamhaus' XBL list and other similar DNSBLs of compromised PCs would be able to acquire a copy of list as well, although they might be better with a sanitised version with hosts known to have been cleansed as a result of the I
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:2)
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:2)
Ah yes, the always lovely combination of denying personal responsibility for one's actions, the implication that anything less than perfection on the part of others is failure, and the dismissal of complex issues as someone else's problem.
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:2)
Yes if I activated a virus on the network it would
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:2)
everyone uninterested in sex didn't reproduce (Score:2)
-russ
Re:everyone uninterested in sex didn't reproduce (Score:1)
Re:Who out there stilll doesn't get it? (Score:1)
I'm guessing about 300,000 of them.
Seems fair enough to me (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Seems fair enough to me (Score:5, Informative)
As long as it disables their internet access too, I don't see the problem.
Unfortunately, that is the problem....it's not going to disable internet access, as that would impair its ability to propogate.
From F-Secure [f-secure.com]: And from E-Security Planet [esecurityplanet.com]:
Re:Seems fair enough to me (Score:1)
Yet more fuel for the fire of ISPs blocking outbound port 25/tcp connections because of spammers and worms.
Re:Seems fair enough to me (Score:1)
Re:Seems fair enough to me (Score:1)
It also helps as the rogue SMTP engine would have to use your credentials to send email through your ISP mail server as well. Unless it can pluck that information from some common place in the registry, it would not be able to authenticate and send.
Re:Seems fair enough to me (Score:2)
The motive? (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe economic chaos? The virus goes after MS Office files and pdfs, the files that are 9/10 the most economically valuable on a PC. I wonder what the impact of getting rid of massive amounts of these files would be?
On the plus side, lazy grad students can now say, "The virus ate my thesis"
Re:The motive? (Score:5, Insightful)
Think of it as a long overdue purge of useless and redundant data on the systems of people who can't be bothered to learn a little about how their computer works or even listen to warning from people who do know a bit. Sort of a way of killing off all the stupid ideas and worthless information before they can do any more harm.
I know that seems harsh, but the only way I learned how crucial backups are was due to some loss of data (personal, fortunately, not the kind that gets you fired). That lesson has remained fresh in my mind for nearly 20 years. If someone survives an attack without great loss, they are more inclined to be complacent about the next threat. If they do lose something of value, they will consider how to reduce their risk in the future (tested backups, run Linux, don't click on email attachments without caution, etc.).
Re:The motive? (Score:4, Interesting)
I have to admit I've been kind of hoping for something like Nyxem that wipes out data would come along for a while now. After all the mainstream media coverage of such worms and trojans, all of which have preached the "don't click on the attachment" line, there is simply no excuse for this kind of thing. Sure, there's not a lot that the less IT aware members of the population are going to be able to do about a 0-day exploit like the recent GDI vulnerability, but a mass-mailing and P2P worm? It's harsh, but I think that losing all their documents is the only way that the IT security message is going to reach some people, and if that wakes them up to more involved stuff as well, then so much the better.
Re:The motive? (Score:3, Funny)
So Holmes, you're saying the culprit is a CS grad student with a project due in on the 4th of February?
Elementary, my dear Watson...
Re:The motive? (Score:2)
Re:The motive? (Score:2)
I'd be more worried about the impact of files being modified rather than deleted. If a file disappears you'll probably know about it, if the number five in a few of your spreadsheets is turned into a a one and all the ones into fives how long would it take to be discovered.
The damage would be far worse if you can't tell the extent of it.
I suppose at least knowing the date this virus is going to start screwing things up
av precautions (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd fancy a virus overwriting common software such as MS Word, Excel or Powerpoint.
Jokes aside. A colleague wrote to the department to look out for the virus, backup all documents, bla bla.. I replyed, being the one who installed the av software, that updates are run hourly and that everybody is safe if they apply the same precautions which they usually (should) do.
So who is right? Me or the colleague who eventually said that my reply to all was conterproductive?
Re:av precautions (Score:1)
lightening, floods and petty machinery theft could strike, not just viruses.
so, i'd consider your collegues advice to be "redundant."
Re:av precautions (Score:3)
People are funny like that. No matter how valid your reply is, they take it personlly when you point out that they are wrong.
I once got a corporate wide email from some guy in some department somewhere, that was telling us to be aware of people calling you on the phone and asking us to punch in a series of digit
Re:av precautions (Score:1)
Curiously, they gave our receptionist exactly the proper sequence of keys to press in order to pick up another trunk, conference in an operator, and then drop out of the call. Of course, this varies from switch to switch. Being the thorough person
Re:av precautions (Score:3, Insightful)
Depends on the reliability of your AV and how well it's monitored (i.e. Can you identify any non-protected machines quickly) as the Virus attempts to disable AV software. Remember - there's always a nice window of opportunity between a virus doing the rounds and your AV software being updated to detect it. In this specific example, it'd only need one infected machine with access to some general shares to cause havoc come Feburary 3rd. Just one machine. AV won't stop a standar
Re:av precautions (Score:3, Informative)
Never put all your eggs in one basket. Trusting that "nothing bad will happen", trusting 3rd-party band-aids like virus scanners and patches only makes you unnecessarily vulnerable.
Not backing up because you don't believe you will ever need it is just as bad as never patching or never updating your virus scanner, because you believe for some reason you'll never get a virus.
It's incredibly easy to do, there are so many circumstances which can le
Re:av precautions (Score:5, Insightful)
Is it really as widespread as claimed? (Score:4, Insightful)
Is this just hysteria whisked up by the AV vendors?
Re:Is it really as widespread as claimed? (Score:1)
Making an extra special backup on 2nd Feb of all your documents would not be a bad precaution.
Re:Is it really as widespread as claimed? (Score:2)
Re:Is it really as widespread as claimed? (Score:2)
Have a look at LURHQ's stats [lurhq.com] for this worm. The short answer is, the 300,000 infections are mostly in non-US countries. India shows the highest infection rate.
Re:Is it really as widespread as claimed? (Score:2)
'On February 3rd...' [something will happen]
'I've yet to actually see an infected machine.'
Written on Jan 30th
Hurry, before it's too late! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Hurry, before it's too late! (Score:2, Funny)
The cynical side... (Score:1)
That being said, the web would probably be a bit scarier place if viruses/software had that kind of physical power...
On t
Old, covered by McAfee since Dec 05? (Score:1)
Re:Old, covered by McAfee since Dec 05? (Score:2)
The Nyxem-E Windows virus first emerged on 16 January
Bob
Please be specific (Score:4, Informative)
jfs
pdf's also (Score:1)
Missing the point (Score:3, Informative)
As stated by others already, LURHQ has distribution stats. http://www.lurhq.com/blackworm.html [lurhq.com] US infections only number about 5% of total. Peru and India have most of the worldwide population of this. (this is ip-based, and may not be reliable.)
I haven't seen another mention, but SANS Storm Center has been following this - and actually has made an offer to sysadmins to share info. They limit the info they will give; if you can reasonably establish that you are the RP for a network or subnet - they will send you a list of known infections in your IP range. They have already sent out notice messages to admins of record (whomever the abuse or tech contact is currently on the whois lookup) using a script. [Check the ISC pages if you really want to know - I don't want to flood them by posting a direct email link here.]
Referred to in the SANS/ISC history on this http://isc.sans.org/blackworm [sans.org] and previous pages - Fortinet has done extensive analysis. This virus has several actions. Most folks already know it deletes files, breaks AV software, and spreads over Windows shares. What hasn't seen much daylight is that it drops a bunch registry entries that grant "trusted" status to the virus. http://www.fortinet.com/VirusEncyclopedia/search/
I read M$' page on this virus, http://www.microsoft.com/security/encyclopedia/de
Any system that has been infected and then cleaned will probably retain these falsified certificates. This leaves a big hole in place, while some users (even the " all your AV is updated hourly folks.. return to your seats" IT guy) - will have a false sense of security on this.
Thankfully, many AV programs discovered this virus Heuristically. (see links to LURHQ & others) McAfee, Panda, NOD32, and several others identified blocked this virus without needing a signature update. This may be why we don't have 2 million AOL/Comcast sheep spreading the virus.
This should serve as a strong reminder to backup religiously, use defense-in-depth, and enforce strong registry policies when Windows systems are implemented.
A rare thing these days? (Score:1)