<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0"> <channel>
<title>Security Response Weblog</title>
<link>http://www.symantec.com/enterprise/security_response/weblog/</link>
<description>Security Response</description>
<dc:date>
2008-09-05T16:27:45+00:00
</dc:date>
<generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/?v=3.2</generator>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<item>
<title>Top Data Protection Myths</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=data_loss_prevention&amp;message.id=3#M3</link>
<description> Plenty has been said about the challenges that exist today for IT and data center managers. I will spare you the typical descriptions about the increase in mission-critical data, plain old exploding volumes of data, and data distributed across a dispersed workforce. We're all well aware of these issues.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p><strong>Myth 1 - Data Protection Solutions Do Not Scale with my Business</strong><br><br>Plenty has been said about the challenges that exist today for IT and data center managers. I will spare you the typical descriptions about the increase in mission-critical data, plain old exploding volumes of data, and data distributed across a dispersed workforce. We're all well aware of these issues.<br><br>Let's talk about the good news. There is a tremendous about of innovation in data protection technologies today. Take a second to think about everything you've heard about granular recovery, data deduplication, cloud-based storage, SaaS, innovative data protection technology for virtual environments, and continuous data protection. These are all technologies that can be applied to solve specific challenges in the context of a larger data protection platform, and IT folks are beginning to catch on to most of them. However, this innovation has come with quite a few myths that I'd like to dispel with a blog series about data protection technologies. I'll take a stab at providing some insight into how organizations can use some of the latest and greatest technologies in data protection - and talk about the most common misperceptions.<br><br>For Myth Number One, I'd like to focus on scalability because of the aforementioned issue of increasing data volumes. Environments are becoming more complex and expanding at a mind-boggling pace. So, scalability is obviously an issue for most users. Often, organizations-particularly those whom are resource-constrained or have little or no in-house data protection expertise-tend to think they need to "rip and replace" data protection software as their business grows. In reality, there has been enough innovation to give users a more dynamic and scalable approach.  <br><br>So what is needed to find the right amount of scalability? Backup and recovery tools must include the capability to synchronize and manage data backups on multiple media servers and provide a central point of administration and control for job processing and load balancing. Whether an organization has just three media servers or more than 100, a central administration capability is essential to manage data protection operations across the entire backup environment. This will give users what they need to manage their IT infrastructure as it grows.<br><br>Centralized administration capabilities offer additional benefits to remote offices and departments, and give you the ability to replicate data from remote office servers to a central location at the corporate office, where data can be reliably backed up and stored.<br><br>An often overlooked, but ever-present pain point is the management of the data protection infrastructure itself-lifecycle management of agents and media servers, especially upgrading versions of product that are several major revisions old; centralization of license information, detection of unprotected resources, and real-time monitoring of data protection storage resources. These are some examples of where data protection solutions are broadening their offerings to solve some long-standing and very labor-intensive problems.<br><br>Keep checking back here more myths around data protection. We will tackle one each day over the next week to address everything from upgrading to disk-based backup, granular recovery technology to backing up virtual machines.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Jason Fisher<br>Director of Product Management, Symantec Backup Exec</strong></p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>JasonFisher</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=data_loss_prevention&amp;message.id=3#M3</guid>
<category>Emerging</category>
<dc:date>2008-09-05T16:27:45+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Month of the Virus</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=spam&amp;message.id=115#M115</link>
<description> In August, the "Internet" category of spam showed an increase of nine percent from July and now makes up 27% of all spam messages. This increase is detailed in the Symantec State of Spam Report for September, which will be released today. The escalation of Internet spam can be attributed to the prevalence of malicious code being sent around via spam emails over the past month.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ In August, the "Internet" category of spam showed an increase of nine percent from July and now makes up 27% of all spam messages. This increase is detailed in the Symantec State of Spam Report for September, which will be released today. The escalation of Internet spam can be attributed to the prevalence of malicious code being sent around via spam emails over the past month. It seems that spammers will stop at nothing to deliver their payload-various techniques in spam containing viruses were observed over "the month of the virus." These include the following methods:<br /><br /><blockquote><ul><li>Sensationalized "fake" news headlines</li><li>Use of seemingly real news headlines</li><li>Purported download for the latest version of Internet Explorer</li><li>Malware + spam + phishing = The triple security threat for financial institutions</li><li>Airline e-ticket connects malicious code and spam</li></ul></blockquote><br />Sensational (and in many cases ridiculous) fake news headlines were all the rage in August. With subject lines declaring everything from possible presidential running mates "McCain Chooses Paris Hilton to be Running Mate" to "Beijing Olympics Cancelled," these emails contained a link to malicious code and were not-and I hate to be the one to break the bad news-legitimate news stories. This malware is designed to infect other computers with viruses and Trojans. Among the subject lines based upon real events that were made to appear like legitimate news articles were the ones abusing of the Russia-Georgia conflict, which we <a href="https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?message.uid=344935" target="_blank">previously blogged about</a>.<br /><br />One high profile attack observed in August invited users to download a free version of Microsoft Internet Explorer 7. The message contained a dotted quad URL with an .exe download that was detected as Trojan.bluesod. Dotted quad spam occurs when the dotted quad address of the spam URL link is used in the spam message body rather than the domain name of the spam URL. This is a prevalent technique in spam and now, virus.<br /><br />A triple threat to security was observed in one single spam attack in August. A phishing message against a financial institution was claiming to introduce new security measures to protect customers against fraud and identify theft. This spam message claimed that the features were mandatory and being introduced immediately via downloadable (hello, virus!) attachment. Typically when phishing, spammers will ask recipients to update account details using a bogus URL link, so this move to a downloadable attachment is a new one. Will it be a lasting technique?<br /><br />You can read all about the above issues in addition to other malicious code and spam duos observed recently in the September <a href="http://www.symantec.com/spam" target="_blank">State of Spam Report</a>.<a href="http://www.symantec.com/spam" target="_blank"> </a><div class='message-edit-history'><span class='edit-author'>Message Edited by SR Blog Moderator on </span><span class='local-date'> 09-04-2008</span><span class='local-time'> 07:45 AM</span></div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Kelly Conley</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=spam&amp;message.id=115#M115</guid>
<category>Vulnerabilities &amp; Exploits</category>
<dc:date>2008-09-04T14:38:23+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Misleading Application Targets Free Online Services</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=security_risks&amp;message.id=49#M49</link>
<description> We have seen in recent times that malicious binaries are spreading through social engineering attack vectors like spam emails, phishing, and social networking sites. This time we have found that attackers have begun targeting free online service sites and our example is based on Google Notebook</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>We have seen in recent times that malicious binaries are spreading through social engineering attack vectors like spam emails, phishing, and social networking sites. This time we have found that attackers have begun targeting free online service sites and our example is based on Google Notebook, although these attacks are not unique to this site. Attackers have started to use Google Notebook as a new social engineering attack vector to spread misleading applications. Misleading applications attempt to convince the user that he or she must remove potentially unwanted programs or security risks (usually nonexistent or fake) from the computer.<br><br>Google Notebook is a free online service that provides a way to save and share information in a single location. This free service offers a feature to save search results, notes, or images online and allow users to share these artifacts with others. Users can create notes with headings and within each note they can add more content, such as links etc.<br><br>Attackers are now taking advantage of this free service to create an attack vector to push misleading applications onto the victims' machines. While researching this problem we found cases where victims were invited to click on a malicious link. We found one author's notebook with more than 50 notes, including fake information and more malicious links. Below is a screenshot to better illustrate what has been found:<br><br><img border="0" height="212" src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/ggl_ntbk1_lrg.jpg" width="400"><br><br><br>When you look closely at the "Last edited" column in the above image, you will see that they are very recent posts. Clicking on the associated links lead to author's notebook pages, where the pages contain fake information and malicious links. Below is a screenshot from clicking on the "Microsoft Windows History" link:</p><p><br><img border="0" height="144" src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/ggl_ntbk2_lrg.jpg" width="400"></p><p><img border="0" height="192" src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/ggl_ntbk3_lrg.jpg" width="400"> <br> <br><br>Based on the contents, the victim is invited to click on the links to get additional information, but ends up getting fake pop-up messages generated by fake Web sites hosting misleading applications. Here is an example of one such pop-up message:<br><br><img border="0" height="106" src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/ggl_ntbk4_lrg.jpg" width="400"> <br><br>When the victim clicks the OK button, a fake antivirus installer is downloaded to the victim's machine. The link on the "Microsoft Windows History" page contains a link to "hxxp://anitspy<removed>.com". This link will redirect the page to "hxxp://<removed>llab.com". If it is a user's first visit to the site, then the site will redirect that Web page to a malicious Web site (hxxp://<removed>pc.com), which serves up a misleading application. In other instances the page will be redirected to a search site called "hxxp://<removed>searcher.com," where the user will see an advertisement to download fake antivirus software. The complete scenario makes it seem as if attackers are running underground affiliate networks to promote misleading applications.<br><br>Social engineering attacks that involve victims who are tricked into clicking on malicious links are not new; however, now the attackers have started using free service sites as a new attack vector to push their misleading applications. Symantec has built excellent safe browsing features in its 2008 solutions and continues to enhance protection technologies in its upcoming 2009 product offerings. Symantec continues to detect misleading applications, including those mentioned above. We recommend that you keep your computer and Internet security products and definitions up-to-date, patch your systems, and run your Web browser with limited options enabled.</p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Umesh Wanve</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=security_risks&amp;message.id=49#M49</guid>
<category>Spam</category>
<dc:date>2008-09-03T16:44:16+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Flash Spammer</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=spam&amp;message.id=114#M114</link>
<description> The theme to Flash Gordon is going through my head. You can't hear it, but I can. He's the savior of the universe, king of the impossible, and he'll save ev'ry one of us.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>The theme to Flash Gordon is going through my head. You can't hear it, but I can. He's the savior of the universe, king of the impossible, and he'll save ev'ry one of us.<br><br>These lyrics seem so appropriate when it comes to all of the .swf (Flash) spam that we're observing. I imagine the spammer looks upon .swf files as saving his spam by ensuring it will bypass filters. Is .swf the "king of the impossible," able to avoid detection? The answer is "no."</p><p><br>What we have observed are spam messages that contain a link to an .swf file. This file is hosted on a popular image hosting site. When clicked, the link redirects to various Web sites and so far we've seen medical supplement and adult-oriented sites as the destination of the redirects.<br><br>The .swf attack with the largest volume observed is the German pharmacy attack, with over 300 million instances seen. The body of this message is in German and includes a list of medications that are offered for sale along with the price and assurances that the transaction will be discreet. To order a product, you are directed to click the link of the .swf file, which then redirects you towards an online ordering site. These sites, as well as the .swf links, seem to be rotating fairly often which is a common spammer technique.<br><br>Another spam sample seen hosting a .swf link was what appeared to be a job recruitment advertisement that required "no professional skills" and instructed the recipient to click the link to fill out the job application. When clicked, the link redirected to a medical supplement site:</p><p> </p><blockquote><em>If you are interested in our job offer, please click on link and fill application form</em><br><em><a target="_blank" href="http://imgXXX.">http://imgXXX.</a>[removed].us/imgXXX/9823/[removed].swf</em><br></blockquote>Spammers are also using this technique to spam adult oriented sites. Below is the text of one message observed where the adult part of the message is directly followed by the .swf link and also some flavor text that has nothing to do with the intent of the message. Spammers insert flavor text such as this in attempts to bypass anti-spam filters:<br><br><blockquote><em>Reality video site starring real swinging couples </em><br><em><a target="_blank" href="http://imgXXX.">http://imgXXX.</a>[removed].us/imgXXX/5742/[removed].swf</em><br><em>2-4 eggs beaten (extra yolks or whites are welcome) 45 minutes. Set aside =</em><br><em>to cool. Note: you can also use cooked white rice. I you use for storing =</em><br><em>the starter!</em><br></blockquote>You never can tell what the spammer will try next in their attempt to become "king of the impossible," which is mail delivery of all their spam. As always, Symantec recommends that you do not click on links of unknown origin, because you never know what evil awaits you.]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Kelly Conley</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=spam&amp;message.id=114#M114</guid>
<category>Vulnerabilities &amp; Exploits</category>
<dc:date>2008-09-03T17:34:51+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Do You Know Where Your Baby Is?</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=spam&amp;message.id=113#M113</link>
<description> Notice! The virus-spreading spammer doesn't have your baby but is claiming to. In recent emails observed by Symantec, malicious code is being spread by hoax emails claiming to have pictures of your hijacked [sic] baby. The Subject line makes the claim that someone has</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ Notice! The virus-spreading spammer doesn't have your baby but is claiming to. In recent emails observed by Symantec, malicious code is being spread by hoax emails claiming to have pictures of your hijacked [sic] baby. The Subject line makes the claim that someone has  "hijacked" your baby and the attachment on the message is not a photo, but rather a zip file containing a downloader:<br><br><blockquote><strong>Subject: We have hijacked your baby</strong><br><strong>Content-Type: application/zip;        name="photo.zip"</strong><br></blockquote><br>The body will look similar to the following:<br><br><blockquote><em><strong>"Hey We have hijacked your baby but you must pay once to us $50 000. The details we will send later...</strong></em><br><em><strong>We has attached photo of your fume"</strong></em><br></blockquote><br>The email comes with an attached zip file called "photo.zip," which contains a file named "photo.exe." The executable is detected as <a target="_blank" href="http://www.symantec.com/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2002-101518-4323-99">Downloader</a> and it is used to get additional malware from the Web. This email is very similar to the "<a target="_blank" href="http://www.fbi.gov/page2/jan07/threat_scam011507.htm">Hit Man Spammer</a>" that was observed last year.<br><br>Symantec has observed over three million instances of this email since Monday, August 25th. Again, we'd like to warn people to not click on suspicious attachments or links. We're currently in a hot period for virus activity and urge people to not take any unnecessary chances with infecting their machines. This includes responding to suspicious emails such as this. Responding may encourage the spammer to escalate their tactics and at the very least will alert them to the fact that yours is a live account. This opens you up for further spamming attacks.]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Kelly Conley</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=spam&amp;message.id=113#M113</guid>
<category>Vulnerabilities &amp; Exploits</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-29T17:58:32+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Security Bugs Vs. Regular Bugs</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=evolution_of_security&amp;message.id=25#M25</link>
<description> There has been much debate recently that stems from discussions related to Linux kernel development, over whether or not security vulnerabilities should be treated differently than regular software bugs. This has meant there has been a slight departure from the exhausted "full disclosure" debate</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ There has been much debate recently that stems from discussions related to Linux kernel development, over whether or not security vulnerabilities should be treated differently than regular software bugs. This has meant there has been a slight departure from the exhausted "full disclosure" debate, in that some believe that the problem with the disclosure process isn't whether or not it best protects users, but that it unfairly praises those that uncover and fix security issues more than those that fix regular bugs. Personally, I think that there are two important distinctions that are not being made.<br><br><strong>Security vs. Availability</strong><br><br>Security and availability are two different things and should be treated as such. Some are quick to argue this, pointing out that a denial-of-service attack against a life support system would obviously be a drastic security problem. They would be right-I am not suggesting that the two are mutually exclusive. If we depend on the availability of a system for our security, then yes, it is indeed a security issue. Fortunately, we are a fairly fault-tolerant species and do not depend on the availability of absolutely everything. As an appropriately timed example, the text editor that I am using to write this blog article just crashed, due to a null pointer access. This could have prevented you from reading my blog. While I do hope my posts are at least somewhat interesting or useful, I am fairly certain that no one is going to suffer without them. Someone may suggest that it's also a security problem because I could have, hypothetically, had the cure for cancer typed up and lost it before I could save it. That's just too much of a stretch, and I think the security issue would have been in my poorly designed work process, if anything. But, if my software were to crash at random intervals several times every hour, now that would be quite a nuisance. So why wouldn't I appreciate the efforts of the individual that fixed it? I certainly would, but that's where the other distinction is important.<br><br><strong>Priority vs. Value</strong><br><br>We have limited resources, limited time, and a limited capacity to digest and respond to information. This creates the necessity for priority. While I do want to know that there is a new version available that will alleviate the need to save after every sentence, there isn't an imperative need for me to know <em>right now</em>. There is no window of attack involved. When it's a security issue, there is an attack window, and I <em>do</em> need to know about that immediately so that it can be minimized. This is why we have security advisories, and why regular bug information is not disseminated in the same manner. Much like availability isn't necessarily related to security, priority is not necessarily related to value. By making the decision to refrain from explicit notification of security-related fixes, you are compromising everyone that necessarily relies on that information in order to prioritize acting upon it according to their circumstances. Those that have the time to immediately download the changelog and attempt to evaluate whether or not every individual change poses a security risk will be fine, but realistically, that is no one. The rest of us really appreciate this courtesy.]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Jesse Gough</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=evolution_of_security&amp;message.id=25#M25</guid>
<category>Grab Bag</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-28T17:29:02+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>When Spammers Kill You While You Sleep</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=spam&amp;message.id=112#M112</link>
<description> I must admit that I was puzzled for a second when I saw an email with a suicide note as subject line in my spam inbox. I wondered what product they might try to sell with that note or which drive-by download site might be hidden behind it. So, I opened it. The email was actually written like a real suicide note.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ I must admit that I was puzzled for a second when I saw an email with a suicide note as a subject line in my spam inbox. I wondered what product they might try to sell with that note or which drive-by download site might be hidden behind it. So, I opened it. The email was actually written like a real suicide note.<br /><br />In the <a href="http://www.melani.admin.ch/dienstleistungen/archiv/01062/index.html?lan%20g=en" target="_blank">text of the message</a>, a young Swiss guy explains that he has had enough with the world and that he has given up his painful fight against the Russian cyber-criminals. With some side notes, he explains that he had at least profited a little from their own tricks and was able to transfer some cash for himself from Swiss online banking accounts. Of course, he explains, all in the name of the greater good.<br /><br />The mail then takes a tangent and tells a story about him catching his girlfriend red-handed with another guy, which finalized his decision of ending his life and the life of the two newly lovers as well. The mail included a couple of links to some other Web sites and the full post address of the person in question. This read as a very sad note and I was somewhat concerned because obviously things like this do unfortunately happen.<br /><br />The astonishing part was not that the address (which did exist) was just five minutes away from my office, but rather that the linked URL was actually a Swiss security blog that I have previously read myself. I remembered that that guy indeed talked quite often about <a href="http://www.symantec.com/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2008-072400-0415-99" target="_blank">Trojan.Wsnpoem</a> & Co. and that his blog had been offline due to DoS attacks for a few days.<br /><br />But, as seems to be the case with most spam, it smelled fishy and a couple of checks confirmed that this was actually a classical "Joe Job," where someone sends spoof emails aimed at tarnishing the reputation of the apparent sender. However, in this case there was a rather new implication used.<br /><br />Despite the fact that the email text stated "when you read this, it's already too late," several dozen people called the appropriate police to report a possible suicide attempt. Because the police have to investigate these cases, they went to the apartment in question and rang the doorbell enough to rouse the poor 21 year-old guy out of bed at 2:00 a.m. in the morning. After the unpleasant awakening he had further problems in that he needed to explain himself and convince the officers that it was not really him who sent the emails, but some spammer-definitely not my favorite thing to do that early in the morning.<br /><br />It is believed that some spammer got upset about this guy's Web site that revealed certain tricks and enlightened others in order to prevent more people from falling victim to the spammed Trojans. In other words, this security blog messed up the profits of the spammers, so they came back with revenge. I haven't seen the log files, but that scenario sounds like the most plausible to me.<br /><br />It's neither new nor uncommon to get threats from malicious code writers if you work in the security industry. There have been numerous cases, from death threats to harmless notes. Anyone remember <a href="https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?message.uid=305264" target="_blank">this friendly note</a>?<br /><br />But, the twist with the fake suicide note was a new one to me, and a sick one as well. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that we no longer just deal with a virus creator's ego that we might have hurt by stepping on his or her toes. Nowadays we often talk about stopping real cash flows, which might really upset some people. I wouldn't be surprised if they came up with more new sick twists. So, if you should ever get a suicide note from me, please call me directly and let me explain first. ;-)<div class='message-edit-history'><span class='edit-author'>Message Edited by SR Blog Moderator on </span><span class='local-date'> 08-27-2008</span><span class='local-time'> 11:04 AM</span></div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Candid Wueest</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=spam&amp;message.id=112#M112</guid>
<category>Vulnerabilities &amp; Exploits</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-27T17:59:48+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>PCI-DSS Version 1.2 - Changes Forthcoming</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=evolution_of_security&amp;message.id=24#M24</link>
<description> The PCI Security Standards Council has released a summary of changes and clarifications for version 1.2 of the PCI-DSS standard, which is scheduled for release on October 1, 2008. In an effort to combat the growing problem of card theft, the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard has been established to ensure that through the use of imposed regulations, compromises of customer card data will not be easily possible.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ The PCI Security Standards Council has released a summary of changes and clarifications for version 1.2 of the PCI-DSS standard, which is scheduled for release on October 1, 2008. In an effort to combat the growing problem of card theft, the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard has been established to ensure that through the use of imposed regulations, compromises of customer card data will not be easily possible. Virtually anyone wishing to handle or process customer card data is familiar with these regulations and probably equally aware of the costs associated with achieving and maintaining PCI compliance. For some people, security is difficult to invest in. You spend a lot of money on something, and you may feel like you don't receive any tangible or perceptible benefit afterwards. You may have even been forced to change some aspects of your business in order to adopt processes that feel less efficient. However, several retailers are now facing serious repercussions from the Federal Trade Commission, as well as bills as high as $16 million to deal with a recent widely publicized security breach. This is roughly the equivalent of forgoing a $50 oil change and later having your vehicle towed, followed by a bill for $5,000 to swap out your seized engine. Perhaps more importantly, you may have failed to uphold the trust that your customers placed in you to safeguard their personal information. This is difficult to put a price on, but most economists will likely tell you that it is very high.<br><br>The US Department of Justice recently announced the indictment of 11 individuals, alleging large scale credit card theft from at least eight major US retailers. One individual named in the indictment has a bit of history in the carding scene, having previously been arrested in connection with Operation Firewall, which brought down Shadowcrew in 2003. In fact, this individual was acting as a key informant in the case, working with law enforcement to set up a VPN for the group that would log all of their activity. Presumably they reached an understanding whereby he would cease his criminal activities, but law enforcement now knows that he instead opted to pursue a slightly different agenda. Now, they would like him and his associate to return the $2 million, Miami condo, 2006 BMW, various laptops, plasma TVs, iPods, and an assortment of other consumer electronics devices that they allegedly purchased since the original encounter, using means that law enforcement feels were less than legitimate. The 41 million cardholders that unknowingly contributed to this comfortable-sounding lifestyle probably share their sentiments, too. I personally had a credit card fraudulently copied and used during that time frame. For all I know, I might have made one of those BMW payments. But more disturbing is the fact that this individual's profits are only the tip of the iceberg. Quite frankly though, if I knew which retailer it was that failed to protect my card, I don't think they would be likely to get my future business.<br><br>This particular attack involved wardriving in front of the establishment to compromise computer systems within a given retailer's premises, and installing a sniffer to capture the "track 2" data off of the credit and debit cards being used to make purchases. Track 2 data, which is what carders refer to as "dumps," resides on the magnetic stripe of credit and debit cards and contains account numbers and expiration dates. This data is then written to other cards using inexpensive magstripe writers, and used to make purchases. One might reasonably expect that the systems performing such transactions are not accessible from the parking lot via unsecured wireless network connections. But, in the case of at least some of the victimized retailers, that was expecting too much. Others victims chose encryption algorithms with poor security, which required only a little more patience on the attacker's part.<br><br>The PCI Security Standards Council has released a summary of changes and clarifications for version 1.2 of the PCI-DSS standard, scheduled for release on October 1, 2008. Some of the updates deal specifically with improving wireless security in areas that were exploited by these attackers. The key changes are as follows:<br><br>-Removal of WEP as an acceptable wireless encryption algorithm<br>-Emphasized requirements for disk encryption on local user account databases<br>-Wireless must use industry best practices and strong encryption, such as 802.11x<br>-Emphasis that anti-virus software requirement applies to all operating systems<br>-Anti-virus solution used must provide coverage against all types of malicious software<br>-More rigorous testing of all public-facing web applications<br>-Emphasis that requirement to secure media applies to electronic and paper media containing cardholder data<br>-Testing procedures must verify that passwords are unreadable in storage and transmission<br>-Additional guidance on wireless analyzers and wireless intrusion detection (IDS) or intrusion prevention systems (IPS)<br>-An Approved Scanning Vendor (ASV) must be used for quarterly external vulnerability scans<br><br>For more information on PCI DSS Standards, you can visit:<br><a target="_blank" href="http://www.symantec.com/business/library/article.jsp?aid=20071010_preserve_protect_data">http://www.symantec.com/business/library/article.jsp?aid=20071010_preserve_protect_data</a><br><br>The Symantec Security Awareness Program also offers a PCI Data Security Standard course. More information can be found at:<br><a target="_blank" href="http://www.symantec.com/business/training/theme.jsp?themeid=ssap">http://www.symantec.com/business/training/theme.jsp?themeid=ssap</a><br><br>If your organization would like information on obtaining Qualified Security Assessor (QSA) or Approved Scanning Vendor (ASV) services from Symantec, please contact <strong>pci@symantec.com</strong>.<div class="message-edit-history"><span class="edit-author">Message Edited by Jesse Gough on </span><span class="local-date">08-26-2008</span><span class="local-time"> 11:56 AM</span></div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Jesse Gough</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=evolution_of_security&amp;message.id=24#M24</guid>
<category>Grab Bag</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-26T18:53:35+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Cisco WebEx Meeting Manager Drive-By Exploit</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=vulnerabilities_exploits&amp;message.id=167#M167</link>
<description> On August 20, our honeypots began to receive attacks against the Cisco WebEx Meeting Manager vulnerability. This August 6 vulnerability exists in the ActiveX control used by WebEx to permit users to participate in meetings via Internet Explorer. Users running the vulnerable version of the Webex control who happened upon a Web site distributing the exploit would become infected. The first exploits that we have seen so far have been served via gaming sites that have had the exploit package injected on to them.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ On August 20, our honeypots began to receive attacks against the <a href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/products_security_advisory09186a00809e2006.shtml" target="_blank">Cisco WebEx Meeting Manager vulnerability</a>. This August 6 vulnerability exists in the ActiveX control used by WebEx to permit users to participate in meetings via Internet Explorer. Users running the vulnerable version of the Webex control who happened upon a Web site distributing the exploit would become infected. The first exploits that we have seen so far have been served via gaming sites that have had the exploit package injected on to them.<br /><br />While WebEx will automatically patch each user when they join a meeting hosted on a patched server, this vulnerability is only two weeks old. Many vulnerable users may have been on holidays, making it reasonably likely that some users will become infected by visiting day-to-day Web sites before their next WebEx meeting.<br /><br />This particular attack is detected by Symantec IPS-enabled products (NIS/NAV/N360, SEP/SCS) as <a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s50176.html" target="_blank">MSIE WebEx Meeting Manager ActiveX BO</a>. Shipping along with this exploit are a series of other exploits detected as follows: <a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s50031.html" target="_blank">ADODB</a>, <a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s23034.html" target="_blank">Microsoft Snapshot</a>, <a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s22922.html" target="_blank">Microsoft Works ActiveX</a>, <a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s50074.html" target="_blank">RealPlayer IERPCtl</a>, <a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s50124.html" target="_blank">RealPlayer console</a>, <a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s22557.html" target="_blank">Yahoo! GetFile</a>, <a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s22595.html" target="_blank">Kodak malformed TIFF</a>, and <a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s50035.html" target="_blank">Microsoft Windows VML</a>.<div class='message-edit-history'><span class='edit-author'>Message Edited by SR Blog Moderator on </span><span class='local-date'> 08-22-2008</span><span class='local-time'> 07:16 PM</span></div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Sean Hittel</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=vulnerabilities_exploits&amp;message.id=167#M167</guid>
<category>Windows Vista</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-23T02:08:34+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Russia/Georgia Conflict News Used to Hide Malicious Code in Spam</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=spam&amp;message.id=111#M111</link>
<description> In the past few days Symantec has observed virus spam masquerading as news articles regarding the current Georgia-Russia conflict. We felt it was important to blog about this because this particular event is garnering a lot of media attention and holds a very high profile.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ In the past few days Symantec has observed virus spam masquerading as news articles regarding the current Georgia-Russia conflict. We felt it was important to blog about this because this particular event is garnering a lot of media attention and holds a very high profile. Because of this, there is an extremely high potential for the spreading of malicious code by spam email using information on this event as a lure.<br><br>The messages themselves contain an attachment, along with instructions and passwords for the download of the attachment. The subject line appears to be a legitimate news story about the Russia/Georgia conflict. One subject line that has been seen reads: "Subject: Journalists Shot in Georgia." A short description of a "news event" related to the Russia-Georgia conflict is contained within the body of the message.<br><br>The use of the attention-grabbing subject line seems to be intended as a social engineering tactic to entice recipients to click the link and view videos. The attachment contains no videos; rather, the attachment redirects to a link that delivers a payload identified as <a target="_blank" href="http://www.symantec.com/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2006-111616-4810-99">Trojan.Popwin</a>. Symantec has had coverage for this malware in place for some time now.<br><br>The use of social engineering to grab the attention of recipients and deliver malware is not a new technique. Symantec has observed this spamming tactic over the past several months. The past month in particular has seen many spammers being exceptionally active in the use of fake news headlines to spread malicious code.<br><br>We have observed several million instances of this particular spam attack delivering malicious code. End users can protect themselves by making sure their virus definitions are current and by thoroughly checking out any links and attachments before clicking/following them.]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Kelly Conley</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=spam&amp;message.id=111#M111</guid>
<category>Vulnerabilities &amp; Exploits</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-21T07:20:52+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Tall Latte, Hold the Malware</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=mobile_wireless&amp;message.id=51#M51</link>
<description> There's nothing like coffee one-upmanship to make the blood boil. "You're still drinking lattes? With actual milk from a cow? Good grief, where have you been?" Nowadays though, it seems that coffee one-upmanship is no longer enough to secure the seemingly coveted "hippest person in the cafE" crown.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <div>There's nothing like coffee one-upmanship to make the blood boil. "You're still drinking lattes? With actual milk from a cow? Good grief, where have you been?" Nowadays though, it seems that coffee one-upmanship is no longer enough to secure the seemingly coveted "hippest person in the cafE" crown. Now that portable devices are actually portable, cafEs and other public spaces seem to be prime territory for people keen to show off their technological gadgetry.</div><div><br></div><div>I've been keeping an eye out during my recent cafE trips - doppio, natch - and usually around half of the customers are tapping away on notebooks, ultra-portables and tablet devices. This is, admittedly, in tech-enamored Tokyo, but the use of truly portable and network-capable machines is clearly going to increase as specs go up and costs come down. CafEs are finding that free Wi-Fi access is now expected by their gizmo-toting customers.</div><div><br></div><div>Early adopters of technology tend to be more technologically savvy and hence more security-conscious than many, but with portable Wi-Fi capable devices now entering the mainstream, we're sure to see security issues arise. So, how best to stay safe in the great outdoors?</div><div><br></div><div>The usual precautions to take when using untrusted Wi-Fi access points apply equally here: not entering sensitive data when browsing the Web, assuming that connections are being eavesdropped on and employing the use of SSL when possible. Tunneling business-related or highly sensitive communications over a VPN can never be a bad thing either (unless, of course, you're trying to listen in).</div><div><br></div><div>Take advantage of WEP or (preferably) WPA encryption if it is offered by the cafE access point. Ask staff for the key, or, alternatively, check the piece of paper you were probably just about to throw away; some cafEs print WEP/WPA keys on receipts, ready to be used by customers. Of course, these encryption techniques are not perfect, but their use may help to deter casual or opportunistic attackers.</div><div><br></div><div>Remember that although you may think you are connected to your friendly cafE-owner's network, the reality may be very different. An "evil twin" access point, capable of DNS spoofing and a whole host (pun intended) of other nastiness, can be set up by anyone with a modicum of Wi-Fi knowledge. Still trust that guy sitting next to you with the laptop and the latte? Me neither.</div><div><br></div><div>It almost goes without saying that the use of a firewall is essential when you're surrounded by potential bad guys. If you use Bluetooth devices, set them to be "hidden" and not "discoverable." If you do not use Bluetooth, turn it off altogether.</div><div><br></div><div>Ultra-portables are likely to be exposed to potentially hostile environments, and as such should be tricked out with security suites and kept up-to-date with updates and vendor patches. Of course, mobile PCs are vulnerable to the same viruses, Trojans, and worms as traditional "big white box" computers are-and, what malicious code author wouldn't want a network of ultra-portable bots under his/her command, sending spam or attacking other systems from ever-changing locations?</div><div><br></div><div>It's a good idea to run file encryption software on portable devices - which need not mean a significant performance hit - in case of loss or theft. Although it may sound obvious, the easiest way to deter thieves is to ensure that your machine is with you at all times; I have seen, on many an occasion, people getting up and leaving their expensive-looking devices on the table unattended. Yoink! Ultra-portable means ultra-stealable, and as such you may want to consider engraving or marking equipment with a UV pen. One further thing to do is to ensure that files that exist only on a portable are backed up "back at base." Mobile devices are easily broken, and, sadly, experience has taught this writer that coffee and keyboards don't play well together.</div><div><br></div><div>With a bit of care in the cafE, mobile computing needn't be fraught with risk. The cafE ultra-portable fashion show, however, is a different ball game altogether. Keyboard or touch-screen? Black or white? Decisions as critical as these are best left to you.</div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Henry Bell</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=mobile_wireless&amp;message.id=51#M51</guid>
<category>Online Fraud</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-20T17:20:52+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Travel the World without Moving - Literally!</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=online_fraud&amp;message.id=94#M94</link>
<description> Back in the 90's, Jamiroquai had a hit album named "Travelling without Moving." The title gives an apt description of some of the fantastic things that you can now do on the Internet. For example, we can now literally travel the world without moving beyond the comfort of the armchair.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Back in the 90's, Jamiroquai had a hit album named "Travelling without Moving." The title gives an apt description of some of the fantastic things that you can now do on the Internet. For example, we can now literally travel the world without moving beyond the comfort of the armchair. Applications such as Google Earth and Google Maps (with its Street View feature) enable anybody with a decent Internet connection to literally drop in to virtually any location on this planet.<br /><br />These applications are great for planning visits-you can see exactly how far your hotel is from the train station, where there is parking, or even plot your full itinerary. You can also use these applications to get a feel for an area before you go there; for example, if you were visiting an unfamiliar area it's really useful to see what the building or location you are going to actually looks like before you get there. Addresses are sometimes hard to recognize and as the saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words.<br /><br />In this age of "carbon footprints," the oil crisis, corporate belt tightening, inflation, stagflation, subprime crisis, and a credit crunch, any means to save or earn extra cash must not be sniffed at. Let's say that you go job hunting and find a company offering you a great part time job where you can earn up a minimum of $2,500 a month. Wouldn't anyone be tempted by that, especially if it is posted in a respected career-search Web site?<br /><br />Before you go sending off your resume (even one posted on well respected careers Web site), wouldn't you want to find out a bit more about the company that you might end up working for? Of course you would. After all, you want to make sure that the company on the receiving end of your services is going to pay up and is not a fly-by-night outfit. So, with that in mind I checked out a job posting by a company named Mortgage Union Trust, based in New York. The company offers a job titled "Monetary Operator" for "responsible individuals to cooperate with Mortgagee Union Trust Company processing department [sic]."<br /><br /><img src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/travel1_lrg.jpg" border="0" width="475" height="696" align="middle" /><br /><br />With a bit of digging, I found that the company also has a nice little Web site (mortgageeunion.com) that gives a company address of 51 South 12th Avenue, Mt. Vernon, NY 10550.<br /><br /><img src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/travel2_lrg.jpg" border="0" width="475" height="456" align="middle" /><br /><br />With the incredible powers of travel conferred upon me and my fellow netizens in support, I decided to drop in on the corporate headquarters where no doubt I would be offered at least a job interview (how could they turn me down with my super Web surfing skills?) once I had sent in my resume. So, with that, I cracked open a new browser window and called up Google Maps, entered in the address, and clicked into the Street View for the neighbourhood in question and this is what I found:<br /><br /><img src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/travel3_lrg.jpg" border="0" width="475" height="449" align="middle" /><br /><br />I have to admit that I'm not familiar with the New York area, but wow! This building is quite different from what I expected. The impressions given by the Web site would lead you to think that it will be all gleaming towers of glass set amongst the financial heart of the city with the office on the 50th floor and fantastic views to boot. So one of these handsome houses on a residential street in New York State is supposed to be the corporate headquarters of a respectable financial corporation? It doesn't really add up, my dream of earning easy cash at home is looking more and more distant. With a bit more research I find that this company is actually the latest in the line of many schemes dreamed up by the gang responsible for <a href="http://www.symantec.com/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2007-060812-4603-99" target="_blank">Trojan.Asprox</a>.<br /><br />Checking out the domain further, you can see that it is fast-fluxing through a whole host of IP addresses. This is definitely not your typical behaviour for legitimate Web sites. These IP addresses are no doubt zombie machines owned by the gang-today they might be hosting this scam Web site, tomorrow they may be sending out spam emails.<br /><br /><img src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/IP1_small.gif" border="0" width="218" height="107" align="left" /></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Well, now that my dreams of an early retirement are shattered and I'm back on Reality Street, there are some sober lessons to be learned from this. It is probably not news to you that there is a heck of a lot of scams out there and identity theft is rife. Recently I posted an article about an <a href="https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=online_fraud&thread.id=93" target="_blank">Olympic ticketing scam</a> that ripped off many unsuspecting people, but this job scam might not necessarily rip you off. In fact, if you "cooperate" with the "processing department" of Mortgagee Union Trust you might even actually make a bit of cash by transferring funds from one account to another when instructed. (The job title should actually be "Money Mule," but it doesn't have the same air of self importance that "Monetary Operator" does.)<br /><br />Whether you can make much, if any, money by taking part in this scheme is uncertain. What is certain is that you will inevitably be playing the pawn in a global game of scams, online crime, and money laundering. Next time an offer that's too good to refuse comes a-calling, save the precious gas and reduce your carbon footprint by using the Internet to visit the company, check out their credentials, and satisfy your curiosity that they are indeed a legitimate organization. Only when you have checked and double checked should you part with your valuable personal information.</p><div class='message-edit-history'><span class='edit-author'>Message Edited by SR Blog Moderator on </span><span class='local-date'> 08-19-2008</span><span class='local-time'> 09:25 AM</span></div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Hon Lau</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=online_fraud&amp;message.id=94#M94</guid>
<category>Security Risks</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-19T15:58:50+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Summer Storm</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=malicious_code&amp;message.id=212#M212</link>
<description> Seventy-seven megabytes of network traffic, 356 spam emails sent and 10,082 unique IP addresses contacted. All in just under 60 minutes.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Seventy-seven megabytes of network traffic, 356 spam emails sent and 10,082 unique IP addresses contacted. All in just under 60 minutes.<br /><br />This is what a system infected by one recent Storm rootkit pumps out. Since Storm first arrived on the scene in January of last year, it has made headlines throughout the world as one of the most successful and persistent threats currently operating in the wild. At Symantec, our global spam traps caught just under 150,000 Storm-generated emails during June and July this year: </p><p> </p><p> </p><div style="text-align: center"><img src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/sumstrm1_lrg.jpg" border="0" width="450" height="343" /></div><p> </p><p>And, the tried-and-true method by which the Storm team successfully infects machines hasn't changed either. The method consists of bulk emailing with "interesting" content aimed at enticing the victim into either visiting a Web site or opening an attachment.<br /><br />The various topics used per spam round included war, politics, murder, adult entertainment, romance, public holidays, sporting events, business transactions, surveys, terrorism and natural disasters and these are certainly a contributing factor to the prevalence and persistence of infections. Such topics, based both on real-world current events and false-but-interesting scenarios, still appear to be a fairly successful propagation technique and are clearly favoured by those behind Storm.<br /><br />At the heart of the rootkit are two files: in this case, <em>glok+serv.config</em> and <em>glok+767-4e80.sys</em>. The first file contains a list of encrypted peers with which the infected host maintains contact with and is updated periodically with new nodes, and the second is the rootkit-based service which performs all of the primary functions of the zombie including spamming, denial-of-service and component updates. A range of API calls are hooked by the rootkit in an attempt to hide its presence on the system, such as <em>ZwEnumerateValueKey</em> and <em>ZwQueryDirectoryFile</em>.<br /><br />The botnet itself runs its main operations over UDP, communicating via a fairly aggressive peer-to-peer network. The resulting traffic surge is fairly easy to spot:</p><p> </p><p> </p><div style="text-align: center"><img src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/sumstrm2_lrg.jpg" border="0" width="450" height="357" /></div> <p> </p><p>The sale of spam-capable services that run from public hosts can net a bot controller a nice income, because fresh zombies can send upwards of 10,000 emails a day. And even if a particular Storm zombie is added to one of the many available spam blocking lists, the bot controller can still run distributed denial-of-service attacks with devastating speed. Also, the variances in the operation of Storm aren't restricted to email subjects, as we have watched its operators use polymorphic packers to defeat CRC-based detection, then experiment by removing the rootkit functionality to leave a plainly visible executable, and then return once again to a rootkit-enabled version.<br /><br />We get quite a few questions in the form of "Yes, but if I get infected what does this actually mean?" To sum it all up, it means that:</p><ul><li>Complete control of your computer system is in someone else's hands.</li><li>Any unprotected private information stored on your system is effectively no longer private.</li><li>Your machine can be used to attack other machines on the Internet.</li></ul><br />It is true that an unusable machine is of no use to a bot herder, and this is perhaps one of the reasons that infected nodes that make up the Storm worm are still quite operational (from the end users' experience). It is in the interest of the players behind botnets that infected machines remain operational and that the suspicions of users are not aroused. This is a clear indication of the financial gains available for criminals who can successfully create and manage a botnet. And, at the time of writing this entry, our monitoring systems show that the spammed emails sent from infected systems are all related to the sale of male enhancement pills.<br /><br />But nothing really hits a point home more than an example involving your money. If you run a company with just 1,000 computers total and you have just 0.5% of your machines infected with the Storm worm, you could be transacting up to 10 gigabytes a day unnecessarily. That's about 3.5 terabytes every year. For those out there who pay per gigabyte for traffic, this is hardly good news.<div class='message-edit-history'><span class='edit-author'>Message Edited by SR Blog Moderator on </span><span class='local-date'> 08-18-2008</span><span class='local-time'> 09:44 AM</span></div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Silas Barnes</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=malicious_code&amp;message.id=212#M212</guid>
<category>Mobile &amp; Wireless</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-18T16:25:08+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Large-Scale Spam Campaign Continues</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=malicious_code&amp;message.id=211#M211</link>
<description> As expected, the arrival of the 2008 Olympics in Beijing was accompanied by an increase in Olympics-related spam. From fake news to performance enhancing medication, spammers are taking full advantage of the Games to entice us to click their links and open their attachments.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>As expected, the arrival of the 2008 Olympics in Beijing was accompanied by an increase in Olympics-related spam. From fake news to performance enhancing medication, spammers are taking full advantage of the Games to entice us to click their links and open their attachments.<br><br>The majority of the malicious links lead to one of a number of variants of Downloader, Backdoor.Trojan, Infostealer, Trojan.Erotpics, and, more recently, Trojan.Pandex. These threats, which use filenames such as get_flash_update.exe, get_flash_codec.exe and install.exe, are entry points for the target install which is a fake antivirus product.<br><br>The tried-and-true method of malicious file delivery for this round is the use of false news stories relating to the Olympics:</p><p> </p><p><img height="395" border="0" width="454" src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/xpspm1_lrg.jpg"><br><br>This particular link (circled in red in the above image) points to one of a range of fraudulent pages hosting the file install.exe (detected as Trojan.Pandex) which, once executed, gets down to work.<br><br>After an encrypted check-in with one of the control servers, several DNS lookups are performed for the malicious domain, which points to a range of fluxing IP addresses under the control of the attackers. The "stub" retrieves a copy of the file 14scan1.exe (detected as Trojan.DesktopHijack.), which changes the victim's desktop:</p><p> </p><p><img height="280" border="0" width="375" src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/xpspm2_lrg.jpg"><br><br>Then, fake security software known as "Antivirus XP 2008" (detected as AntivirusXP2008) is downloaded and installed on the victim's machine:</p><p> </p><p><img height="280" border="0" width="375" src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/xpspm3_lrg.jpg"></p><p><br><br>The results from this supposed scan are, of course, fraudulent and rely on unsuspecting victims to pay the activation fee in order to mitigate these non-existent threats. To add to the confusion, a fake "Blue Screen of Death" screensaver is silently installed and activated, and some of the graphical display controls in the Display Properties tab are disabled so the user cannot change the screensaver back to the original one easily.<br><br>As mentioned above, Symantec has a number of detections for the malicious files. In addition, Symantec Browser Detection triggers on malicious pages as <a href="http://http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s22979.html" target="_blank">HTTP Fake Codecs WebPage</a>.<br><br>You may also have seen reports of malicious spam doing the rounds with updates to Microsoft products, including the Malicious Software Removal Tool and Internet Explorer 7, videos with adult material, and news alerts from CNN and MSNBC. The links contained within these spam emails also end up downloading and installing the fake Antivirus XP 2008 software.<br><br>Whether the group behind Antivirus XP 2008 are controlling this entire campaign or have employed the services of additional malicious parties to enhance the success of their spam delivery service, over 500,000 spam emails have been recorded via our probe network with links to Antivirus XP 2008 in the past 14 days, representing quite a large spike in activity for a single threat. As always, make sure you update your security products regularly to ensure you are protected against the latest threats.</p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Silas Barnes</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=malicious_code&amp;message.id=211#M211</guid>
<category>Mobile &amp; Wireless</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-15T17:59:58+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Security Professionals and Social Networks</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=grab_bag&amp;message.id=105#M105</link>
<description> Security professional understand the risks of social networks better than anyone. So, given the concerns they may have, do they actually use social networks? Earlier this year we surveyed 87 security administrators from companies in North America and Europe, from both large companies and small, in order to find out.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ Security professional understand the risks of social networks better than anyone. So, given the concerns they may have, do they actually use social networks? Earlier this year we surveyed 87 security administrators from companies in North America and Europe, from both large companies and small, in order to find out.<br><br>Our first discovery was that security administrators are not much different than anyone else-they do use social networks. In our survey, only 30% say they do not use social networks; however, they are cautious about them. They are concerned about the ability to separate work and private friends (60%). They want to make sure that "coworkers don't see my personal contacts." Some only use business related sites. Or, as once security admin put it: "I never mix anything like serious work and my social network."<br><br>It is not surprising that the vast majority will refuse an invitation they receive on a social network (70%). Why do they refuse a "friendship" or "connection" from someone? Mostly they refuse invitations from people they have never met. If they don't know who the person is they decline the invite. But, they will also reject people they know. Security administrators are concerned about the implied endorsement of someone when you bring them into your online circle of friends. Sometimes a past employee should stay right where they are, in the past. And, they don't want other people to have access to them through colleagues. A friend of a friend is not necessarily my friend. But if I connect with a friend, I get all his contacts in the bargain. And the people they seem most concerned about connecting to them this way are recruiters. Many administrators do not want headhunters to approach them through social networks.<br><br>What are the security concerns about social networking usage among end users in their organization? No surprise here, it's the big three: malicious code attacks (43%), data leakage (48%), and in fact, lost productivity was the biggest concern of the three at 53%.<br><br>We wanted to know what they and their companies were doing about this concern. Surely this was leading them to taking decisive action on the use of social networks at work-well, actually the answer to that is "no." The vast majority don't block access to social networks at work. They usually have no company policy on end users accessing social networks and they are not working on one.<br><br>At first blush that seems a little surprising. As one of our survey participants said, "The content on social networks is dubious - not the content we want users visiting from work." Another said "too many worms, malware" on social networks. There is also the threat from the loss of intellectual property; "Confidential information [is] being shared." And the phrase "time waster" came up again and again.<br><br>So, why are they not taking any action? 77% are concerned about the security risks of their end users using social networks at work, but 72% do not block social networks. Sixty-seven percent have no company policy on social networks, and 80% of those people are not working on one. There are a few very logical reasons for this. Here's what one security administrator says: "The largest security issue is malware; however, that threat is there with social networks at work or not. If employees take their laptops home they may inadvertently infect themselves and bring it back in. So, blocking the sites from the workplace doesn't really gain any advantage." Here's another: "I would not aim just at social networks. There are limitless vectors for malware attacks, espionage, and productivity loss, besides social networking. I think a comprehensive data leakage model would be best instead of looking at a few specific methods."<br><br>And finally, one more reason. Many companies are embracing social networks as a way to market themselves and their products. What if your company blocked access to a social network while the marketing department was using the same social network to promote an event? It happened to one of the companies surveyed: they had to reverse their policy. Their own employees couldn't access the networking group created by the marketing team.<br><br>Social networks are one more tool/application in the company network. Instant messaging (IM) generated many of the same concerns when it first crept into the business world. Ultimately, the vendors added security features, 3rd party security tools became available, users became knowledgeable of the risks, and consequently IM became accepted as a legitimate business tool. Will the same thing happen to social networks? It seems likely. And while security administrators remain concerned about the security risks, they seem to be taking it all in stride. For them, it's been there, done that.]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Kevin Haley</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=grab_bag&amp;message.id=105#M105</guid>
<category>ISTR</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-15T11:54:54+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Black Hat Review - Conclusion</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=emerging&amp;message.id=111#M111</link>
<description> Well, sadly the time seemed to fly by and last week's conference ended more quickly than I would have liked. I didn't have the time to stay in Vegas and attend the DEFCON conference either. Even though I really wanted to see Christopher Tarnovsky demonstrate smartcard/microcontroller fault induction in person, I decided to attend briefings that greatly complemented the briefings that I attended previously.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p class="MsoNormal">Well, sadly the time seemed to fly by and last week's conference ended more quickly than I would have liked. I didn't have the time to stay in Vegas and attend the DEFCON conference either. Even though I really wanted to see Christopher Tarnovsky demonstrate smartcard/microcontroller fault induction in person, I decided to attend briefings that greatly complemented the <a target="_blank" href="https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=emerging&thread.id=110">briefings that I attended previously</a>. Particularly, I enjoyed Felix Lindners ("FX") briefing entitled "Developments in Cisco IOS Forensics", which actually did a lot to ease my previous fears that the defensive side of the arms race for Cisco IOS was being left behind.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Felix began his talk by explaining the impact of successful exploitation of Cisco IOS vulnerabilities, providing some details about Cisco IOS internals, and then explaining why the flat memory format is so dangerous. For example, even the smallest memory corruption bug could potentially be leveraged to overwrite critical structures anywhere in memory. "Just how often are routers hacked?" was covered with some very interesting points, such as the threat of TCL backdoors and patched IOS firmware. He also brought up an example of an old vulnerability that continues to see exploitation, namely, the old <a target="_blank" href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/2936">HTTP level 16 bug </a>that is still being exploited in the wild, as well as the new <a target="_blank" href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/29623/info">SNMP HMAC issue</a>. So, routers are being targeted in the wild and I believe this will only get more common, especially as other targets become increasingly difficult to exploit. A path of least resistance, if you will.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">In his presentation, FX also covered how the Cisco IOS router is a volatile memory system. From a forensics perspective, this makes it very difficult to find any evidence of an attack after the system reboots. How does an administrator tell the difference between a "normal" router reboot and a reboot that is the result of an exploit attempt? The talk evolved into a compelling discussion about Cisco IOS crash-dump functionality and how it can be used for the purposes of forensics without impacting the performance of the router. Postmortem analysis of a crash dump file that is far too in-depth for the scope of this blog entry was covered in detail. This research is exciting. The Cisco Crash Dump analysis tool dubbed "CIR" (which FX says is a work-in-progress) is available as an online service for <a target="_blank" href="http://cir.recurity-labs.com/">free</a>. For those paranoid about uploading their crash dumps to a third party, it is my belief that a professional standalone version of the tool will be made available by Recurity labs. (But, I could be wrong about this-it would be best to contact Recurity Labs for more information.)</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">I can't end this blog without mentioning two of the other high points of my day. The talk given by Ben Hawkes named "Attacking the Vista Heap" was excellent. The talk came to the conclusion that heap exploitation is no longer generic; instead, it is now application-specific, requiring certain conditions to leverage corruption into code execution. However, lots of interesting techniques were divulged. I followed up his briefing by attending the Alexander Sotirov and Mark Dowds briefing on "How to Impress Girls with Browser Memory Protection Bypasses." Wrapped in droll comedy, this briefing was fantastic. It started out with a demonstration of an exploit achieving code execution on Windows Vista with GS, SafeSEH, DEP, and ASLR enabled. Really, it is far too detailed to cover here along with the Cisco IOS forensics talk. I don't feel that I'm doing the talks any justice in my attempts to describe them, so I'd say that it's best to go explore the <a target="_blank" href="http://cir.recurity.com/wiki/Default.aspx?Page=UsingCIR&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1">Recurity CIR wiki</a> for more complete information on this research and to read the "How To Impress Girls With Browser Memory Protection Bypasses" <a target="_blank" href="http://taossa.com/archive/bh08sotirovdowd.pdf">paper</a> and <a target="_blank" href="http://taossa.com/archive/bh08sotirovdowdcode.zip">code</a>. GS, SafeSEH, DEP, and ASLR - all defeated in a client-side exploit. Why are you still reading this? Go read the paper!</p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Anthony Roe</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=emerging&amp;message.id=111#M111</guid>
<category>Evolution Of Security</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-14T18:47:54+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Another Round of Peacomm Infections Underway</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=malicious_code&amp;message.id=210#M210</link>
<description> The Peacomm network has definitely turned out to be a survivor. With infections dating back to January 2007 and a P2P structure largely unchanged in about a year, Peacomm continues to evolve and infect new hosts. In early August our honeypots began capturing a new version of Peacomm.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ The Peacomm network has definitely turned out to be a survivor. With infections dating back to January 2007 and a P2P structure largely unchanged in about a year, Peacomm continues to evolve and infect new hosts. In early August our honeypots began capturing a new version of Peacomm. This iteration has been relatively low key as it propagates via users visiting infected Web sites, rather than by spam. Although Peacomm has been distributed via infected Web sites in the past, they were usually Web sites that were spammed to users as opposed to relying on drive-by downloading to gather its new recruits.<br /><br />The attack toolkit used to install Peacomm in these drive-by attacks has changed as well. The infection begins with a user visiting an infectious Web site, which silently redirects the user to hostile content on a set of registered domains via an IFRAME. At this point, Kallisto TDS will serve a set of exploits against the victim. These include <a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/27641" target="_blank">Acrobat PDF CollectEmailInfo</a>, <a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/23194" target="_blank">ANI Header Size</a>, and <a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/17462" target="_blank">MDAC</a>.<br /><br />Symantec IPS (NIS, NAV, N360, SEP, and SCS) will detect these attacks as follows with existing signatures:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s21719.html" target="_blank">HTTP ANI File Hdr Size BO</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s23043.html" target="_blank">HTTP Malicious Toolkit Download Activity</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s21864.html" target="_blank">HTTP MS Unsafe ActiveX Obj Instantiation</a><br /><br />If a system were to become infected, the Peacomm P2P traffic will be detected as:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s22639.html" target="_blank">BD Peacomm Trojan</a> - and the bot would be detected by antivirus as <a href="http://www.symantec.com/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2007-011917-1403-99&tabid=1" target="_blank">Trojan.Peacomm</a>.<div class='message-edit-history'><span class='edit-author'>Message Edited by SR Blog Moderator on </span><span class='local-date'> 08-14-2008</span><span class='local-time'> 04:16 PM</span></div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Sean Hittel</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=malicious_code&amp;message.id=210#M210</guid>
<category>Mobile &amp; Wireless</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-14T23:08:38+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Black Hat Review - Day 1</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=emerging&amp;message.id=110#M110</link>
<description> The first day of the Black Hat conference briefings came to an end and in retrospect, it was far from bland. From Professor Angell's esoteric keynote speech touching on how the combination of computers and human activity systems can spawn systemic risk, to a Palace 1 conference room packed wall-to-wall with eager ears ready to listen to Dan Kaminsky deliver his briefing for DNS titled "DNS Goodness."</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ The first day of the Black Hat conference briefings came to an end and in retrospect, it was far from bland. From Professor Angell's esoteric keynote speech touching on how the combination of computers and human activity systems can spawn systemic risk, to a Palace 1 conference room packed wall-to-wall with eager ears ready to listen to Dan Kaminsky deliver his briefing for DNS titled "DNS Goodness."<br><br>In fact, the room was packed so much that an organizer dryly announced over the PA system: "Speakers in parallel talks, you can't skip your talks even though nobody is going to be there." It was a good briefing, but it was two other entirely separate briefings that stole the show for me, by a huge margin actually. Neither of these briefings received an abnormal amount of limelight, but both of them involved appliances that are very commonly used in inter- and intra-network infrastructure. The briefings "Cisco IOS Shellcodes and Backdoors" by Gyan Chawdhary and Varun Uppal and "Viral Infections in Cisco IOS" by Sebastian Muniz of Core Security were not only excellent, but also served well to clearly demonstrate that Cisco IOS shellcodes, backdoors, and viral persistent-type infections are clearly feasible.<br><br>I mean, even four years ago we knew that these memory corruption for remote code execution attacks against IOS were somewhat feasible. For some (myself included, I'm sad to say), they were feasible in a contrived epic take-over-the-Internet-world movie plot sort of way. Although somewhat realistic, the attacks still seemed like they'd be too arcane for anybody to invest the time to research, especially when there were so many other easier Windows RPC vulnerabilities to exploit. With any closed project, it takes time as layers of obscurity are stripped away before common attacks are plausible.<br><br>With the foundation of research performed by Felix Lindner (FX) and Michael Lynn, among others, it seems that Cisco IOS exploitation research is evolving to a very accessible point, especially with the addition of "Cisco IOS Shellcodes and Backdoors" and the excellent "Viral Infections in Cisco IOS" briefings. Perhaps it is accessible enough for individuals or groups with malicious intent to begin leveraging remotely exploitable memory corruption vulnerabilities in Cisco IOS, if the potential reward is high enough, of course. I don't think that's an outlandish claim. Or maybe that's just how I perceive these events. Most of these devices are situated at our network perimeters beyond a lot of the security appliances that are designed to protect against malicious remote attacks.<br><br>But what about all of those appliances on the Internet that have not been patched in years or that are running IOS versions that are no longer supported? I can't imagine that everybody keeps their Cisco appliance firmware current. But even if a person or group with malicious intent can write a generic and reliable exploit for an older remotely exploitable memory corruption vulnerability, they still need to write a complex payload that is designed to analyze the flat memory space of Cisco IOS, hook several critical functions, and then find ways to remain persistent. Some tricks on how this could be done were revealed in both of the Cisco IOS talks that I mentioned previously.<br><br>I think that whatever your perspective is on the current risk of in-the-wild Cisco IOS exploitation, you might agree that there needs to at least be an increase in open discussion on how we should respond to or mitigate what seems to be a growing potential of malicious code finding its way onto our embedded network devices.]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Anthony Roe</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=emerging&amp;message.id=110#M110</guid>
<category>Evolution Of Security</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-13T16:42:55+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Microsoft Patch Tuesday for August 2008</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=vulnerabilities_exploits&amp;message.id=166#M166</link>
<description> Hello and welcome to this month's blog on the Microsoft patch releases. This is one of the largest releases with 11 bulletins covering 26 vulnerabilities. Seventeen of the vulnerabilities are client-side issues rated "critical;" the remaining nine are rated "important."</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p class="MsoNormal">Hello and welcome to this month's blog on the Microsoft patch releases. This is one of the largest releases with 11 bulletins covering 26 vulnerabilities. Seventeen of the vulnerabilities are client-side issues rated "critical;" the remaining nine are rated "important." The client-side issues affect multiple applications, including Microsoft Color Management System, Internet Explorer, Office, PowerPoint, and Excel, but most notably is the vulnerability affecting the Snapshot Viewer for Microsoft Access. This is a previously known public issue (<a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/30114" target="_blank">BID 30114</a>) that has already seen exploit attempts in the wild. The remaining issues affect Word, Windows Event System, PowerPoint, Outlook Express and Windows Mail, Messenger, as well as Windows IPSec policies.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">As always, customers are advised to follow security best practices, including:</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">-<!-- [endif] --> Avoid sites of questionable or unknown integrity</p><p class="MsoNormal"><!-- [if !supportLists] -->-<!-- [endif] --> Do not open files from unknown or questionable sources</p><p class="MsoNormal"><!-- [if !supportLists] -->-<!-- [endif] --> Run all client software with the least privileges required while still maintaining functionality</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Microsoft's summary of the August releases can be found here:</p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms08-aug.mspx" target="_blank">www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms08-aug.mspx</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Some of the more notable vulnerabilities this month are:</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>1.</strong> <strong><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS08-041.mspx" target="_blank">MS08-041</a></strong> <strong>Vulnerability in the ActiveX Control for the Snapshot Viewer for Microsoft Access Could Allow Remote Code Execution (955617)</strong></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>CVE-2008-2463</strong> (<a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/30114" target="_blank">BID 30114</a>) Snapshot Viewer for Microsoft Access ActiveX Control Arbitrary File Download Vulnerability (MS Rating: Critical / Symantec Urgency Rating 8.9/10)</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">This is a previously documented vulnerability in the Snapshot Viewer ActiveX control that allows an attacker to download a file to an arbitrary location on the victim's computer. An attacker must trick a victim into visiting a Web page containing malicious content to exploit this issue. If the victim does not currently have the ActiveX control installed, and the victim uses Internet Explorer 6, the attacker can install the control without any further user interaction. A successful attack will result in the execution of arbitrary code in the context of the currently logged-in user.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Affects: Snapshot Viewer for Microsoft Access, Microsoft Office Access 2000 SP3, Microsoft Office Access 2002 SP3, and Microsoft Office Access 2003 SP2 and SP3</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="bulletintitle"><strong>2. <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS08-046.mspx" target="_blank">MS08-046</a> Vulnerability in Microsoft Windows Image Color Management System Could Allow Remote Code Execution (952954)</strong></p><p class="bulletintitle"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>CVE-2008-2245</strong> (<a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/30594" target="_blank">BID 30594</a>) Microsoft Color Management System Pathname Vulnerability (MS Rating: Critical / Symantec Urgency Rating 7.1/10)</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">A remote-code execution vulnerability affects Microsoft Color Management System (MSCMS) when handling a malformed image file. An attacker only needs trick a victim into viewing a Web page or email that contains a malicious picture file to exploit this issue, no further user-interaction is required. A successful attack will result in the execution of arbitrary code in the context of the currently logged-in user.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Affects: Microsoft Windows 2000 SP4, Windows XP SP2 & SP3, Windows XP Professional x64 Edition, Windows XP Professional x64 Edition SP2, Windows Server 2003 SP1 and SP2, Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition, Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition SP2, and Windows Server 2003 with SP1 or SP2 for Itanium-based Systems</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>3. <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS08-044.mspx" target="_blank">MS08-044</a> Vulnerabilities in Microsoft Office Filters Could Allow Remote Code Execution (924090)</strong></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>CVE-2008-3019</strong> (<a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/30595" target="_blank">BID 30595</a>) Microsoft Malformed EPS Filter Vulnerability (MS Rating: Critical / Symantec Urgency Rating 7.1/10)</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">A client-side remote code-execution vulnerability affects Microsoft Office filters when handling malformed graphics images. By tricking a victim into opening a specially crafted Encapsulated PostScript (EPS) file, an attacker can execute arbitrary code in the context of the currently logged-in user.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Affects: Microsoft Office 2000 SP3, Microsoft Office XP SP3, Microsoft Office 2003 SP2, Microsoft Office Converter Pack, and Microsoft Works 8</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>CVE-2008-3018</strong> (<a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/30597" target="_blank">BID 30597</a>) Microsoft Malformed PICT Filter Vulnerability (MS Rating: Critical / Symantec Urgency Rating 7.1/10)</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">A client-side remote code-execution vulnerability affects Microsoft Office when handling specially malformed PICT files. PICT files are normally associated with Apple Quicktime, but if opened with Microsoft Office, arbitrary code-execution can occur. An attacker must trick a victim into opening a malicious file to exploit this issue.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Affects: Microsoft Office 2000 SP3, Microsoft Office XP SP3, Microsoft Office 2003 SP2, Microsoft Office Converter Pack, and Microsoft Works 8</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>CVE-2008-3021</strong> (<a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/30598" target="_blank">BID 30598</a>) Microsoft PICT Filter Parsing Vulnerability (MS Rating: Critical / Symantec Urgency Rating 7.1/10)</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">A client-side remote code-execution vulnerability affects Microsoft Office when handling specially malformed PICT files. PICT files are normally associated with Apple Quicktime, but if opened with Microsoft Office, arbitrary code-execution can occur. An attacker must trick a victim into opening a malicious file to exploit this issue.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Affects: Microsoft Office 2000 SP3, Microsoft Office XP SP3, Microsoft Office 2003 SP2, Microsoft Office Converter Pack, and Microsoft Works 8</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>CVE-2008-3020</strong> (<a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/30599" target="_blank">BID 30599</a>) Microsoft Malformed BMP Filter Vulnerability (MS Rating: Critical / Symantec Urgency Rating 7.1/10)</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">A client-side remote code-execution vulnerability affects Microsoft Office when handling specially crafted BMP image files. An attacker must trick a victim into opening a malicious file with Microsoft Office to exploit this issue. A successful attack will result in the execution of attacker-supplied code in the context of the currently logged-in user.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Affects: Microsoft Office 2000 SP3, Microsoft Office XP SP3, Microsoft Office Converter Pack, and Microsoft Works 8</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>CVE-2008-3460</strong> (<a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/30600" target="_blank">BID 30600</a>) Microsoft Office WPG Image File Heap Corruption Vulnerability (MS Rating: Critical / Symantec Urgency Rating 7.1/10)</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">A client-side remote code-execution vulnerability affects Microsoft Office when handling specially crafted WordPerfect Graphics (WPG) files. An attacker must trick a victim into opening a malicious file in Microsoft Office to exploit this issue. A successful attack will result in the execution of attacker-supplied code in the context of the currently logged-in user.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Affects: Microsoft Office 2000 SP3, Microsoft Office 2003 SP2, Microsoft Office XP SP3, Microsoft Office Converter Pack, and Microsoft Works 8</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><hr /><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">More information on these and the other vulnerabilities being addressed this month is available at Symantec's free <a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/30600" target="_blank">SecurityFocus</a> portal and to our customers through the DeepSight Threat Management System.</p><div class='message-edit-history'><span class='edit-author'>Message Edited by SR Blog Moderator on </span><span class='local-date'> 08-12-2008</span><span class='local-time'> 12:56 PM</span></div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Robert Keith</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=vulnerabilities_exploits&amp;message.id=166#M166</guid>
<category>Windows Vista</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-12T19:04:01+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>ActiveX Vulnerabilities: Even When You Aren't Vulnerable, You May Be Vulnerable</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=vulnerabilities_exploits&amp;message.id=165#M165</link>
<description> Recently, we came across a rather unfortunate exploit case for the Access Snapshot Viewer ActiveX Vulnerability that took advantage of a property of the ActiveX system to exploit IE users who did not have the vulnerable control installed. How does one exploit a vulnerability that does not exist on a system you say?</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p class="MsoNormal"><span class="content">Recently, we came across a rather unfortunate exploit case for the<span style="color: navy"> <a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/30114" target="_blank">Access Snapshot Viewer ActiveX Vulnerability</a></span> that took advantage of a property of the ActiveX system to exploit IE users who did not have the vulnerable control installed. How does one exploit a vulnerability that does not exist on a system you say? Sadly, attackers have found a way to install the vulnerable Access Snapshot Viewer ActiveX control through Internet Explorer prior to exploiting it.</span><br /> <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /> <!--[endif]--></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span class="content">Because the control is Microsoft signed, its installation is silent, and does not require any user interaction. Once this vulnerable control is installed on the victim's computer, it is exploited in the same way as if the control was installed all along. To top it off, this attack is carried out as a drive-by attack, so the unprotected user may never know that they were vulnerable, or had been targeted, let alone infected.</span><br /> <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /> <!--[endif]--></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span class="content">While this silent installation ability obviously poses some interesting security considerations, it is actually fairly core to ActiveX operation. For example, a site that wants to provide an Access report for its users may want to install the trusted control and permit the users to simply view the report. This would provide a cleaner experience for the site's users, rather than forcing them to go to the Microsoft site to download and install the control.</span><br /> <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /> <!--[endif]--></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span class="content">This silent install attack is specifically detected by IPS (NIS, NAV, N360, SEP, and SCS) products as</span> <span style="color: navy"><a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s23074.html" target="_blank">HTTP Snapshot Viewer ActiveX Download Request</a></span>. If the subsequent exploit is encoded, it will be detected by Symantec Browser Protection (NIS 2008, NAV 2008, N360 v2) as<span style="color: navy"> <a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s23034.html" target="_blank">MSIE MS Snapshot ActiveX File Download</a></span>. If the exploit is not encoded, IPS will detect is as <span style="color: navy"><a href="http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/attack_sigs/s23034.html" target="_blank">HTTP SnapShot Viewer ActiveX File Download</a></span>. Additionally, Symantec antivirus programs will detect this attack as <span style="color: navy"><a href="http://www.symantec.com/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2002-101518-4323-99" target="_blank">Downloader</a></span>.</p> <div class='message-edit-history'><span class='edit-author'>Message Edited by SR Blog Moderator on </span><span class='local-date'> 08-06-2008</span><span class='local-time'> 02:34 PM</span></div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Sean Hittel</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=vulnerabilities_exploits&amp;message.id=165#M165</guid>
<category>Windows Vista</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-06T21:30:16+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Symantec State of Spam Report - August</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=spam&amp;message.id=110#M110</link>
<description> As we enter August, Symantec takes note in the State of Spam Report that spammers are continuing to attempt to entice users to open their messages by sensationalizing false news events. Popular targets of this headline or tabloid spam include current public events and figures, such as Obama and McCain.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p class="MsoNormal">As we enter August, Symantec takes note in the <a href="http://eval.symantec.com/mktginfo/enterprise/other_resources/b-state_of_spam_report_08-2008.en-us.pdf" target="_blank">State of Spam Report</a> that spammers are continuing to attempt to entice users to open their messages by sensationalizing false news events. Popular targets of this headline or tabloid spam include current public events and figures, such as Obama and McCain.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><br />In July, some of the subject lines observed were:</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><ul><li><strong>Beijing Olympics cancelled</strong></li><li><strong>Beijing postpones Olympics due to McCain-Dalai Lama meeting</strong></li><li><strong>Mccain Says Unsure If Obama A Secret Hippopotamus</strong></li><li><strong>Kick-up - Obama speaks in London - video</strong></li></ul><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">In the samples observed, the URLs were hosting malicious code (malware). There is a continuing link between spam and other security threats with a penchant for spammers to utilize current events to lure users to open their messages.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Also seen last month was a spam message containing both a proclamation of the start of World War III in the text and a Trojan virus attached to the message. This is another example of spammers banking on human curiosity to open messages with sensational headlines and click links by utilizing current events, which in this particular case happen to be false.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Important to note is the prevalence of malware associated with such spam types. Victims too frequently succumb to curiosity and sensationalism rather than resisting the lure to open messages and further clicking the links. If the headline - or in this case subject line - seems ridiculously sensational, it probably is. If you do open the email, make very sure not to click any links. Instead, use your browser to navigate to a reputable news source and check to see if the headline is true.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Also observed by Symantec in July was a fraud attack targeting Microsoft's POP3 users. The spam email states that the recipient has a POP3 setting problem and needs to click on the URL in the mail to confirm the account data. The body of the email shows simple warning text informing the recipient that the message comes from Microsoft and detailing what the issue is. There is also a URL for the recipient to click to renew their POP3 data. Of course, the URL does not lead the recipient to the correct Microsoft Web site but a hacked Web site, which is being used to obtain personal information from the recipient.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">So far, the volume of this particular attack is low. Whenever messages such as this are received, please practice due diligence by verifying the origin of the message and checking out the validity of the URLs. You should always use caution when giving out any personal information online because you never know exactly who is asking for it or how the information will be used.<br /><br />For more on the above and other highlights, please see the <a href="http://eval.symantec.com/mktginfo/enterprise/other_resources/b-state_of_spam_report_08-2008.en-us.pdf" target="_blank">August State of Spam Report</a>.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><div class='message-edit-history'><span class='edit-author'>Message Edited by SR Blog Moderator on </span><span class='local-date'> 08-05-2008</span><span class='local-time'> 07:54 AM</span></div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Kelly Conley</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=spam&amp;message.id=110#M110</guid>
<category>Vulnerabilities &amp; Exploits</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-05T14:52:39+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Buyer Beware - Scam Olympic Ticketing Sites About</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=online_fraud&amp;message.id=93#M93</link>
<description> A timely warning to those wishing to purchase last minute tickets for the Beijing Olympic Games of 2008 to beware of scams and rip offs. There are some fake but very well crafted ticketing Web sites that have been duping unsuspecting members of the public out of their hard earned cash by posing as legitimate suppliers for Olympic events.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span>A timely warning to those wishing to purchase last minute tickets for the Beijing Olympic Games of 2008 to beware of scams and rip offs. There are some fake but very well crafted ticketing Web sites that have been duping unsuspecting members of the public out of their hard earned cash by posing as legitimate suppliers for Olympic events. In particular, one such scam site (<strong><span>beijingticketing.com</span></strong> and its mirror site <strong><span>beijingticketing2008.com</span></strong>) has, according to media <a href="http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24124123-662,00.html" target="_blank">reports, </a>already ripped off many individuals, some to the tune of US $57,000.<br /><br /> </span></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span>This scam site claims to be able to source tickets for sold out sporting events, playing on the fact that many Olympic event tickets are already sold out due to huge demand. I checked out the site today and found that tickets for the opening ceremony (which were sold out some time ago) are still available from US $1,750 apiece. I guess to many people this looks like a fantastic opportunity to go to a once-in-a-lifetime event. Probing deeper into this Web site, I found many telltale signs that this site may not be quite what it claims to be. Let's look at some of them now.<br /><br /></span></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span>First off, the "About Us" section of the Web site offers some clues:<br /><br /></span></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><img src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/olym1_lrg.jpg" border="0" width="470" height="377" /></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span><br />I found some of the statements in this page a little suspect, which raised some questions in my mind. For example: "Beijingticketing.com has been trading since 2007. We are part owned by a major international sporting events company who have over 25 years experience in obtaining the best seating at popular and sold out events." Ok, so, if this outfit is part of a major international sporting events company with 25 years of experience, how come there is no mention of whom exactly this major company is?<br /><br /></span></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span>Plus, as highlighted in various news reports, the contact details are inconsistent. The phone number is UK based, the office address is in Arizona. On this page it mentions that BeijingTicketing has "three international offices" </span></font><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri; color: navy">-</span><font face="Arial" size="2"><span>one in London, New York, and also Sydney. Alright; great, but then how come the only contact address is in Arizona?<br /><br /></span></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span>Out of interest I decided to call the phone number given to see if I could book some tickets and I had a few questions for the sales person. Unfortunately, while the number in the UK actually connects, it just rings a few times and then goes dead. So, no luck getting tickets using the phone. Instead I decided to try out the e-ticket sales system. I selected tickets for the Tennis event and proceeded with the checkout, filled out a few standard contacts and billing forms. Then I was forwarded to the credit card information page using an SSL connection, and the tell tale padlock made its, usually reassuring, appearance. I filled in the form with obviously bogus information and interestingly, my transaction was successful!<br /><br /></span></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><img src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/olym2_lrg.jpg" border="0" width="470" height="504" /></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span>What this suggests to me is that the backend is simply collecting personal information and is not running it through any credit transaction process at the time of collection. At the time of writing I see that this site is still live, and if you run an online search for "Olympic tickets" you will likely find that this scam site features prominently near the top of your search results.<br /><br /> </span></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span>The creators of this site have gone to great lengths to create a site that is extremely convincing, even down to the calendar of events and the amount of legitimate looking content on the site. Clearly this is the work of professional criminals looking to profit from even very savvy online users looking to enjoy an Olympic experience.<br /><br /> </span></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span>Please be careful and only ever purchase tickets to sporting events through the organizer's official ticketing partners and watch out for too good to be true offers such as last minute tickets to sold out events. As is always the case when it comes to buying anything online, buyers beware.</span></font></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><div class='message-edit-history'><span class='edit-author'>Message Edited by SR Blog Moderator on </span><span class='local-date'> 08-04-2008</span><span class='local-time'> 11:43 AM</span></div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Hon Lau</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=online_fraud&amp;message.id=93#M93</guid>
<category>Security Risks</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-04T18:19:56+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Safe Summer Travels on the Information Superhighway</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=grab_bag&amp;message.id=104#M104</link>
<description> With the Olympics right around the corner and being that we are in the heart of the summer, I'm sure many of you will find yourselves travelling quite extensively. Nowadays, it's almost impossible to go cold turkey from the Internet. It's equally impossible to find a place that doesn't offer some ability to get you online</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p class="MsoNormal">With the Olympics right around the corner and being that we are in the heart of the summer, I'm sure many of you will find yourselves travelling quite extensively. Nowadays, it's almost impossible to go cold turkey from the Internet. It's equally impossible to find a place that doesn't offer some ability to get you online - whether you're in the heart of the Serengeti or even on a cruise ship in the middle of the Atlantic (I have actually seen Internet kiosks in both of these places!).</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">With that, we wanted to offer some tips to keep your online travels safe, even when you are away from home:</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="msolistparagraph">1. Don't let your laptop or PDA sprout mysterious legs. Leaving your laptop out in the open in your hotel room can often prove irresistible to a thief. Many thieves are even known to scour popular vacation or conference spots looking for someone who leaves their laptop alone. I'd go as far as to say that it's a good idea to be discreet about even having a laptop in the first place. Finally, along the same lines, with all the hoops people have to jump through at the airport, many passengers simply forget to put their laptops back in their bags at the security checkpoint. As a precautionary measure, you should encrypt your data before you travel. The last thing you would want is a thief getting their hands on a recent bank or credit card statement (or even pictures from your vacation last year).</p><p class="msolistparagraph"> </p><p class="msolistparagraph">2. Make sure all the critical software applications on your machine have up to date patches. This includes not only the core operating system, but also third party applications that you run - whether it's the software you use to purchase and play your favorite music, or simply what you use to view documents. Since you may find yourself surfing over less-than-friendly networks, it helps to ensure that you're not an easy mark for a cyber attacker.</p><p class="msolistparagraph"> </p><p class="msolistparagraph">3. Accidentally dropping your laptop while running to catch your flight can be hazardous to your data. And let's also not forget the risks associated with the person sitting next to you on the plane - whether they are looking over your shoulder or spilling a beverage on your device. A privacy screen can help keep your information secure. And backing up critical files can keep you calm if there is a spill.</p><p class="msolistparagraph"> </p><p class="msolistparagraph">4. Always run a comprehensive Internet security software suite that is up to date. While you are out and about, and connecting to the Internet in entirely unfamiliar locales, you should keep in mind that the network may not be completely secure. Therefore, it's good to keep your machine protected from the large number of malicious threats that surreptitiously traverse the roads of cyberspace.</p><p class="msolistparagraph"> </p><p class="msolistparagraph">5. Be careful of machines at the local cyber cafe or free internet kiosk - the last person to have used the machine may have unknowingly (or knowingly!) left a nasty piece of malware on there for you. In general, never use these machines to connect to a web site that requires you to type your password or for that matter don't type any sensitive information into these systems. For all you know, that information could be recorded and sent to an attacker half way around the world. In one instance we are aware of, travelers who failed to heed this advice had their brokerage accounts emptied because their passwords were recorded by keystroke loggers installed on machines in an Internet cafe. If you use your own computer at an Internet cafe, be sure that any sensitive information you enter into it is encrypted, either by using a virtual private network (VPN) or by ensuring that you are communicating over SSL.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">The summer is a great time to relax and unwind. So, I hope you employ these tips and keep yourself virtually safe wherever you physically find yourself. Bon Voyage!</p><div class='message-edit-history'><span class='edit-author'>Message Edited by SR Blog Moderator on </span><span class='local-date'> 08-01-2008</span><span class='local-time'> 09:39 AM</span></div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Zulfikar Ramzan</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=grab_bag&amp;message.id=104#M104</guid>
<category>ISTR</category>
<dc:date>2008-08-01T16:37:51+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Rg00dP@55Wrd53z?</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=grab_bag&amp;message.id=103#M103</link>
<description> Tell me if this sounds like a familiar scenario. You've come up with a brilliant password - it's strong, easy to remember, and you've finally mastered the finger gymnastics required to type it in quickly - only to find that the usage window, mandated by IT password policy, is up.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p class="MsoNormal">Tell me if this sounds like a familiar scenario. You've come up with a brilliant password - it's strong, easy to remember, and you've finally mastered the finger gymnastics required to type it in quickly - only to find that the usage window, mandated by IT password policy, is up. So you come up with a new one, double it, add 32, and then subtract the letters from your mother's maiden name. Only now IT requires you to include at least two punctuation characters, but that just throws the logic of your method right off.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Password creation is a constant dance between security and convenience, where good passwords that bridge the gap are hard to come by. On the one hand, strong passwords, changed on a regular basis, do reduce the likelihood of success for a wide range of attacks. On the other hand, if you make something too complex, you run the risk of forgetting it-somewhat ironic evidence of its security.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">So, the ultimate question is, how do you come up with passwords that are both strong and straightforward? It's something I've thought about on more than one occasion while staring at those twin text boxes, "New Password" and "Confirm New Password". So I put this question to a variety of folks within Security Response. What follows are methods used by people within the security industry to make passwords with a good balance of security and easy-of-use.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">I want to preface this by stating that a strong password isn't the golden ticket to Internet security. There's been plenty of debate about the usefulness of passwords in today's world of exploits and social engineering tricks. Plus, if your password is picked off by a keylogger or spoof Web site, it's DOA no matter how complex. But passwords aren't going anywhere any time soon and strong ones do help keep your information safer.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Character substitution</strong></p><p class="MsoNormal">Straight out of the Password 101 book, substitute numbers and special characters for letters that are similar in shape or sound: 3 for E, + for t, 8 for "ate". Vary capitalization as well. I'm mentioning these up front not because they're original, but to provide a word of caution. Most dictionary attacks these days take such substitution into account, and will often run these variations against common words. Simply put, something like "password" is not much more secure if spelled out as "P@55w0rD". Still, it's good practice, but should be coupled with other techniques.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>A pinch of salt</strong></p><p class="MsoNormal">A concept borrowed from cryptography, you can <a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Password_cracking#Salting">salt your passwords</a> by adding a few pseudo-random characters. It could be anything from the year you got your first car to the number of claws your three-legged cat has. (Easily identifiable personal info, such as birthdates, is best avoided.) For example, I could take "cr4ck3rs", salt it with my weight in kilograms on Jupiter, and come up with "cr41ck36rs5". This technique makes dictionary attacks much more difficult, and significantly slows down brute force attempts.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Phrases from movies/songs</strong></p><p class="MsoNormal">The world of movies and music provide a rich lexicon of phrases, ripe for password picking. There are the ones we all know, like "D0Uf33l|uckyPunk?" or "WH0|3L0++aLuv". Better yet, use lesser-known references ("Ch|03d0n'tKn0wB3++3r") or maybe play upon a plot thread instead ("0MG,Sh3W45aH3?!"). Of course, there's no limit to sources for such password phrases. Grab a sentence out of random book, try a quote from a comedian, or use a cheesy line from a newspaper advertising insert.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>First letter sentences</strong></p><p class="MsoNormal">Another twist on password phrases is to use the first letter of each word in a longer sentence. "Another world, another time, in the age of wonder" becomes "Aw,At,i+40W". This one also takes the teeth out of dictionary attacks, since it contains no words.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Other languages </strong></p><p class="MsoNormal">Do you speak a second language? Do you want to? Try writing a sentence in another language, or simply incorporating a word or two into your password. Assuming your Italian is as "brutto" as mine, it's all the less likely it'll be figured out. (Still, be sure to include character substitution to avoid non-English dictionary attacks.) You could even mix it up with <a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructed_language">constructed languages</a>, txt spk/<a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolcat">lolcats</a> grammar, or one of any number of <a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_game">language games</a>.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Passwords as affirmations</strong></p><p class="MsoNormal">Think of it as the <a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Smalley">Stuart Smalley</a> approach. Need to watch the budget? ("S4v3S0m3$$") Spending too much time playing video games? ("L3t'sG0Ou+51d3") Tired of pining over the girl who lives in your building? ("A5kS4||y0ut") I'm not a psychologist, but typing in such a password on an average of eight times a day is bound to stick somewhere in the subconscious. Affirmations are more likely to be the types of things you wouldn't share with others as well, being more personal thoughts kept close to the chest. Just remember to keep them positive. "N0D0nut,ChuBBy" doesn't really help anyone.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Elements in page</strong></p><p class="MsoNormal">Here's a clever one for Web-based accounts: create the password out of a combination of elements in the page. For example, if you were creating a password for the <a target="_blank" href="http://www.symantec.com/stn/index.jsp">Symantec Technology Network</a>, you could combine the first few letters of the dominant color on the page ("yellow"), the logo ("sphere"), and the last words on the page ("Contact Us"). To separate the different elements, insert a marker between each element ("Y3l!Sph!tUs"). There are two things to remember with this method. First, be sure to choose elements that are unlikely to change when the page is updated. Secondly, if you plan to use this for more than one site, establish a method you'll remember across various sites.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">One final thing worth mentioning is that out all the responses I received, not one person used any of the above exclusively. In each case, most folks used a combination of the methods to shore up more secure passwords.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">So there you have it. Hopefully there are enough interesting tips to finally retire that four-letter password you've used on multiple online forums for years. Still there's no need to go overboard, churning out the typing equivalent of a tongue twister. The key is to find a good balance between strength and ease-of-use.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><div class="message-edit-history"><span class="edit-author">Message Edited by Ben Nahorney on </span><span class="local-date">07-18-2008</span><span class="local-time"> 07:44 AM</span></div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Ben Nahorney</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=grab_bag&amp;message.id=103#M103</guid>
<category>ISTR</category>
<dc:date>2008-07-18T14:41:31+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Bye Bye Bandwidth?</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=spam&amp;message.id=109#M109</link>
<description> Everyone knows that in a matter of hours, hype can turn a small event into something much larger in the minds of society. Enter the latest round of malicious spam we have seen here at Symantec-the death of the Internet.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p class="MsoNormal">Everyone knows that in a matter of hours, hype can turn a small event into something much larger in the minds of society. Enter the latest round of malicious spam we have seen here at Symantec-the death of the Internet.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">The following spam subject lines have been seen:</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>Secret Plan To Kill Internet By 2012: Leaked?</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>PLAN TO KILL THE INTERNET BY 2012- Documented</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>2012: The year the Internet as we know it dies...</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>2012: The Year The Internet Ends</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">This certainly sounds devastating because many of us spend a rather large amount of our time, both as part of work and as part of life, online. Addition information on this apocalyptic event continues in the various body texts we have seen, including:</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>Every significant Internet provider around the globe is currently in talks</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>with access and content providers to transform the internet into a</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>television-like medium...</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>It's heresay, but I heard that the growth of the Internet will bring it to a</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>dead halt come about 2012. People are going nuts...</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>The reason why we're releasing this information is because we believe we can</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>stop it. More awareness means more mainstream media shedding light on it,</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>more political interest and more pressure on the ISP's to keep</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>the Internet an open free space...</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>It's happening and it could be as soon as 2010. There are documented facts</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>that the internet, as we know it today, will disappear. For those wondering</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>why we are experiencing "black holes" read on...</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>ISP's have resolved to restrict the Internet to a TV-like subscription mode</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>where users will be forced to pay to visit selected corporate websites by</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"><em><strong>2012...</strong></em></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Then there is the attachment, "doc.pdf." The file contains malicious code that is executed on the system when the file is opened. The malicious code is detected as Trojan.Pidief.A by Symantec products. So far, the attachment being used is the same across the board (MD5 - 4977c984367355f590a8bb159f76d94d9) but there's no guarantee that this will remain the case. As you can see by the graph below, the location of the presumably infected machines that are pumping out the spam emails is quite broad; however, the bulk of the spam is originating from the United States:</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><img src="https://www-secure.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/images/security_response/blogs/SB_hypespm.jpg" border="0" /> </p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><span>I personally don't think the Internet will come to a grinding halt in 2012, or that a subscription- style service will be set up. However, I'm sure that some people out there won't be able to resist reading more from the document attached to this hype-based spam.</span><div class='message-edit-history'><span class='edit-author'>Message Edited by SR Blog Moderator on </span><span class='local-date'> 07-11-2008</span><span class='local-time'> 10:28 AM</span></div>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Silas Barnes</dc:creator>
<guid>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=spam&amp;message.id=109#M109</guid>
<category>Vulnerabilities &amp; Exploits</category>
<dc:date>2008-07-11T16:40:35+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>I'd Buy That for $10</title>
<link>https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?blog.id=istr&amp;message.id=8#M8</link>
<description> The costs of most goods are so much higher than they were 30 years ago. Back then, cars were under $10,000 (I remember this because the Price is Right only had four missing digits in their Lucky Seven game). You could feed a family of four for $10 and even</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p class="MsoNormal">The costs of most goods are so much higher than they were 30 years ago. Back then, cars were under $10,000 (I remember this because the Price is Right only had four missing digits in their <a href="http://gscentral.net/lucky7.htm" target="_blank">Lucky Seven game</a>). You could feed a family of four for $10 and even have change left over to buy a 25 cent candy bar. But what can you buy for $10 in 2008? I could buy just under three gallons of gas for my car, which would probably last me a couple of days. I could buy lunch at the local sushi place but only lunch since there wouldn't be enough left to buy something to drink. Or, I could buy 10 United States identities.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">On underground economy servers, criminals sell a variety of illegal goods and services including bank account credentials, credit card numbers, and full identities. Typically, these goods are used for identity theft related activities. In the <a href="http://www.symantec.com/business/theme.jsp?themeid=threatreport" target="_blank">ISTR XIII</a>, Symantec observed that the cost of a full identity was 10 times cheaper than it was at the beginning of 2007 and has gained in popularity to become the number three top ranked item advertised for sale. The contents of a full identity may vary, depending on the seller: it typically consists of a name, address, date of birth, phone number, and/or Social Security number. I've also seen sellers include extras such as driver's license number, mother's maiden name, email address, or "secret" questions/answers to entice buyers.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Most people associate identity theft with money as most reported cases involve criminals using the identity for activities such as obtaining credit cards, applying for loans, obtaining expensive <a href="http://www.idtheftcenter.org/artman2/publish/v_fact_sheets/Fact_Sheet_130_Basic_Medical_Identity_Theft.shtml" target="_blank">medical or pharmaceutical treatments</a>, or <a href="http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_3092.aspx" target="_blank">stealing homes</a>. Financial identity theft is only one of the many types of identity theft that exists. The <a href="http://www.idtheftcenter.org/index.html" target="_blank">Identity Theft Resource Center</a> (ITRC) categorizes identity theft into <a href="http:/www.idtheftcenter.org/artman2/publish/v_fact_sheets/Fact_Sheet_100_-_Financial_Identity_Theft_-_The_Beginning_Steps.shtml" target="_blank">five major types</a>: financial (the identity is used to obtain goods and services), criminal (the identity is used during a criminal investigation or arrest), commercial (the identity of a business is used to obtain credit), governmental (the identity is used to obtain government issued documents such as a passport or driver's license), and cloning (the identity is assumed by another and used on a daily basis).</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Once a criminal purchases a full identity, it can be used to accomplish a variety of tasks, including making a lot of money. Usually, they change the victim's mailing address to route all mail, including credit card bills and financial statements to another location. The