It seems the latest development is the accidental development of new super-malware strains created by viruses infecting executable files of worms. Worms are generally executable files and well, viruses infect executables – so you can imagine what happens.

Now the franken-worm has both the characteristics of the original worm and it also carries the virus – so when it spreads, the virus also spreads.

Viruses are accidentally infecting worms on victims’ computers, creating super-powered strains of hybrid software nasties.

The monster malware spreads quicker than before, screws up systems worse than ever, and exposes private data in a way not even envisioned by the original virus writers.

A study by antivirus outfit BitDefender found 40,000 such “Frankenmalware samples” in a study of 10 million infected files in early January, or 0.4 per cent of malware strains sampled. These cybercrime chimeras pose a greater risk to infected users than standard malware, the Romanian antivirus firm warns.

“If you get one of these hybrids on your system, you could be facing financial troubles, computer problems, identity theft, and a wave of spam thrown in as a random bonus,” said Loredana Botezatu, the BitDefender analyst who carried out the study. “The advent of malware sandwiches throws a new twist into the world of malware. They spread more efficiently, and will become increasingly difficult to predict.”

BitDefender doesn’t have historical data to go on. Even so it posits that frankenmalware is likely to grow at the same rate as regular computer viruses, or about 17 per cent year on year.

There’s really unlimited possibilities with this, and the great thing (to me anyway) is that it occurred by complete accident. I guess the next step up would be virus authors purposely hunting down worm files and infecting them with additional capabilities.

There’s always been cases of malware in the past that hunt down other malware and remove them from the host machine.

All of the malware hybrids analysed by BitDefender so far have been created accidentally. However, the risk posed by these combos could increase dramatically as crooks latch onto the idea of deliberately splicing malware strains together to see what sticks. This is on top of efforts by blackhat coders to add extra features to others’ viruses and unleash the updated builds onto the unsuspecting public.

BitDefender carried out its study after finding a sample of the Rimecud worm that was infected by the Virtob file infector. Rimecud is designed to steal online passwords for e-banking or e-mail accounts, among other functions. Virtob creates a hacker-controlled backdoor on infected systems.

“Imagine these two pieces of malware working together – willingly or not – on the same compromised system,” Botezatu explains. “That PC faces a twofold malware with twice as many command and control servers to query for instructions; moreover, there are two backdoors open, two attack techniques active and various spreading methods put in place. Where one fails, the other succeeds.”

I wonder what will happen in the future with this and if the bad guys will really jump on this already sailing ship and use it to their advantage.

If you are interested you can read more on BitDefender’s Malware city blog here:

Virus infects worm by mistake

Source: The Register

There’s been a lot of highly technical and most theoretical attacks lately, academic season really is in full swing. This is a very neat attack which is being labeled somewhere between catastrophic and mildly annoying depending on who you ask.

It effects most of the major Anti-virus vendors, it’s called an argument-switch attack and leverages on the way in which most anti-viral suites interact with the Windows kernel.

It seems to be most critical on Windows XP which is an operating system near the end of life anyway, so it shouldn’t be too widespread – that’s even assuming the bad guys can work it out and spread it in the wild (I would safely assume they can). Although the research does indicate it also works on Vista SP1.

A just-published attack tactic that bypasses the security protections of most current antivirus software is a “very serious” problem, an executive at one unaffected company said today.

Last Wednesday, researchers at Matousec.com outlined how attackers could exploit the kernel driver hooks that most security software use to reroute Windows system calls through their software to check for potential malicious code before it’s able to execute. Calling the technique an “argument-switch attack,” a Matousec-written paper spelled out in relatively specific terms how an attacker could swap out benign code for malicious code between the moments when the security software issues a green light and the code actually executes.

“This is definitely very serious,” said Alfred Huger, vice president of engineering at Immunet, a Palo Alto, Calif.-based antivirus company. “Probably any security product running on Windows XP can be exploited this way.” Huger added that Immunet’s desktop client is not vulnerable to the argument-switch attacks because the company’s software uses a different method to hook into the Windows kernel.

Some of the AV vendors are using different methods to communicate with the Windows kernel, so aren’t vulnerable to this attack – such as Immunet. I hope the collective AV companies pull their fingers out and do some real testing on this attack to see if it can really impact consumers or not.

What we really don’t need is “Oh it’s really complex and unlikely, it’s not a big deal” – then later 200,000 machines get owned using the technique. At least they know about and can perhaps address the sloppy methods they are using to implement kernel hooks.

According to Matousec, nearly three-dozen Windows desktop security titles, including ones from Symantec, McAfee, Trend Micro, BitDefender, Sophos and others, can be exploited using the argument-switch tactic. Matousec said it had tested the technique on Windows XP SP3 and Vista SP1 on 32-bit machines.

Some security vendors agreed with Huger. “It’s a serious issue and Matousec’s technical findings are correct,” said Mikko Hypponen, chief research officer at Finnish firm F-Secure, in an e-mail.

“Matousec’s research is absolutely important and significant in the short term,” echoed Rik Ferguson, a senior security advisor at Trend Micro, in a blog post earlier Monday.

Other antivirus companies downplayed the threat, however. “Based on our initial review of the public documentation, we believe this is a complicated attack with several mitigating factors that make it unlikely to be a viable, real world, widespread attack scenario,” a McAfee spokesman said in an e-mail reply to a request for comment. “The attack would require some level of existing access to the target computer, as the attack described by Matousec does not on its own bypass security software or allow malware to run.”

Kaspersky Lab had a similar reaction. “[We] have analyzed the published material and concluded that the issue is only linked to certain features of [our] products,” Kaspersky said in an e-mailed statement. “Kaspersky Lab products implement not only [kernel] hooks, but a wide range of technologies, including secure sandboxing and other methods of restricting suspicious kernel mode activity.”

I guess most AV companies don’t go that deep into system security, to the point of exploring how they implement kernel addressing and hooks to enable their software to function. Either way the research is now published, is picking up quite a bit of press and that itself is likely to force some action.

The full paper is available with details of the attack from Matousec here:

KHOBE – 8.0 earthquake for Windows desktop security software

Source: Network World

AVG used to be THE anti-virus software a few years ago, especially with it being the first major vendor offering a free solution for home users.

If you asked any techie back in 2002 which AV should you use, the answer would invariably be AVG free (or perhaps Panda).

After that AVG just got bloated, slow and their signature files became very weak missing a lot of nasty infections, I had to fix so many PCs running AVG that were infected up the ass with all kind of malware.

People starting recommending other like Avast!, Avira and BitDefender which also offer free use versions for home use.

AVG is putting an emphasis on increased speed with a revamp of its free and paid for security suites.

The latest revamp – AVG 9.0 – boasts 50 per cent faster speed and increased ease of use. Improvements in speed have been achieved by skipping the scan of files already marked as safe in future scans unless the file structure changes. The approach also offers claimed improvements of ten to 15 per cent for boot times and memory usage, respectively.

The firewall module in AVG 9.0 has also been redesigned to be less intrusive (ie fewer ‘Do you want to allow this application online’ questions) alongside tighter integration with the anti-malware scanner that forms the core of the product. This anti-malware scanner makes greater use of behaviour-based, cloud-based and white-listing technologies.

I haven’t tested AVG 9.0 yet as the free version isn’t being released until later this month, but if it stands up to their claims it could be a good product.

Speed and bloat is definitely something they need to work on along with a more accurate scanning engine and complete signature files.

Let’s hope it’s not all just hype.

AVG Free 9.0 will be available mid-October. Details of the features are being held back until then, but expect to see a cut-down product based on the same engine but without a firewall and other bells and whistles. Based on past form, AVG free will offer an anti-malware scanner alongside LinkScanner safe search technology.

AVG’s business model relies on selling into small business and getting a percentage of consumer users of its free product (perhaps around two per cent) to upgrade. The consumer end of this equation is severely threatened by Microsoft Security Essentials launch.

Recommendations from tech savvy friends were one of the main reasons consumers latched onto AVG in the first place. AVG lost a lot of goodwill in this area with the traffic-spewing fiasco that attached to version 8.0 of its security scanner.

Secondly, irrespective of the technical merits of its product, AVG is facing off against Redmond’s marketing muscle while at the same time hunting for a new chief executive.

Microsoft Security Essentials is definitely a huge entry barrier for them and they will need to push hard to gain back a decent market share. There are some extremely good AV products out there now and a lot more choice for consumers.

Plus of course the big fat behemoths are still out there bundling their software with OEMs (Symantec, McAfee etc).

We shall see if it stands up to the tests of real world use.

Source: The Register

Conficker has gotten quite a lot of news recently with it growing so fast and Microsoft offering a bounty for the authors.

It seems like the Conficker authors are really serious about retaining control of their botnet and expanding it further without hindrance from the companies trying to stop them.

It’s quite likely they are netting some serious cash from the network of infected computers, with estimates at over 10 million now that’s a large collection of computers for brute forcing, e-mail spam or DDoS attacks.

The authors of the latest variant of the Conficker worm are upping the ante against security vendors who are working to stop the spread and threat of the persistent program.

Conficker.C shuts down security services, blocks computers from connecting to security Web sites, and downloads a Trojan. It also is programmed to begin connecting to 50,000 different domains on April 1 to receive updated copies or other malware, as opposed to connecting to 250 domains a day as previous versions are doing, Ben Greenbaum, senior research manager for Symantec Security Response, said on Friday.

The authors of the code are “strengthening their hold on their collection of infected machines at the same time they are attempting to strengthen their ability to control those machines by moving to 50,000 domains,” he said.

A self-described “cabal” of companies, including Microsoft, Symantec, and a host of domain registration providers, have been trying to thwart the efforts of Conficker by pre-registering and locking up the domain names being used by the worm to distribute updates.

They are getting sneaky now, targeting security software and services on an infected PC and blocking it from accessing related sites that could help a user fix the infection.

Plus they have expanded their ‘update’ domains to 50,000 – which will take a huge effort to get all of the domains blocked.

I wonder what the next step will be in protecting again this?

Now that Conficker.C is targeting 50,000 domains, the group has its work cut out for it, Greenbaum said. Regardless, “it’s unknown at this point whether (boosting the domains) is an effective sidestep around the cabal’s actions,” he said.

The worm, also called Kido or Downadup, was first detected in November and is believed to have infected more than 10,000 computers. The first two versions exploit a vulnerability that Microsoft patched in October.

The second variant, Conficker.B, was detected last month. It added the ability to spread through network shares and via removable storage devices, like USB drives, through the AutoRun function in Windows.

Among the domains targeted by Conficker was that of Southwest Airlines, which was expected to see an increase in traffic from the botnet on Friday, Sophos said last week. However, a Southwest spokesman said there had been no impact to the site from any additional traffic as a result of Conficker.

I hope this stays as just Conficker, if there’s another large scale breakout we might be in trouble again. There is a way to remove it though, so if you know anyone that has managed to get themselves infected you can give them the below links:

• Enigma Software Group Conficker Removal Tool
• BitDefender Conficker Removal Tool

Source: Cnet (Thanks Navin)