New Worm that Doesn't Need Attachment

[minibubba]

There is a new bagle worm that uses an exploit in IE. It does not need to have the user open an attachment, they just need to read an email with HTML in it.

There is a test to see if you are vulnerable here:

http://secunia.com/MS03-032

More detailed info here:
href=http://secunia.com/advisories/9580/

Bagle Q info here:

http://www.sophos.com/virusinfo/analyses/w32bagleq.html

Go straight to the patch, here:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS03-040.mspx

-[netadmintools.com]

[zeradul]

Another virus exploiting a vulnerability that was patched weeks ago. Ya know, if company computer guys are so dumb and lazy to not install the updates, then I am glad these viruses exist. They exist to get those guys fired.

[Darthtanion]

I don't think I can agree with your sentiment. While not a network administrator, I am usually one of the first ones called in my Department when problems arise and usually act as the middle man between our employees and IT. So I have had the chance to see the nightmare it can create when you try to update roughly 800-1000 machines... not all of which run the same OS... not all of which are ON at the given time you're trying to set up a fix to vulnerabilities.

Now lets add another piece to the problem by bringing in the totally computer illiterate user who MAY have enough sense to turn a machine on but not much more. They get an email and automatically open it up. Even with updated AV software for the network firmly in place and sitting very comfotably behind a firewall, the user goes to town using no sense at all when it comes to safety, security or anything remotely resembling common sense and opens this email.

I recall seeing a commercial that is currently running about a corporate executive talking to a fellow employee about how a virus tried to infect their network and they couldn't figure out how it was getting into the system. The next scene shows the executive's daughter claiming she just found another fun game she downloaded from the Internet. While not exactly in context with this thread, it shows you how even a well planned and executed update policy can be thrown through the wringer due to negligent/unintelligent users.

So no, I am not glad these virii exist as they are nothing more than a bunch of script kiddies with nothing better to do than to try to make a name for themselves at someone else's expense.

[#Hashx#]

Totaly agree As I have had to deal with Virus Problems too and have seen the Headache, Tension, agrevation, and unnecessary arguments between fellow employes and especialy the boss! Yikes!! But the level of severity was way lower as this was only on a couple of machines, but still could have caused major Delays and even could have destroyed important data that one Co-worker was working on, so no These types of things are not really somthing to be glad of. :wink: :roll:

[zeradul]

Yes, but my point is that if it is a virus that can only propogate on machines that aren't patched. I am not in favor of a viruses in any sense, but when a dumb admin gets caught without having done the updates, it serves him right.

[asklepios]

So I have had the chance to see the nightmare it can create when you try to update roughly 800-1000 machines... not all of which run the same OS... not all of which are ON at the given time you're trying to set up a fix to vulnerabilities.

any place with 800-1000 machines should have a smart enough Network Administrator to establish a SUS server. that will automate the process and will at least relieve tha admin of the stress

Now lets add another piece to the problem by bringing in the totally computer illiterate user who MAY have enough sense to turn a machine on but not much more.

these people should start using "Automatic Updates". if you don't know how to manually update then it would be stupid to switch off such an important service. At this point the argument may come that Win98se or other older OS don't have such services but imo if you are using a PC then you should at least be caring enough to install various updates. at least after what Blaster did to people.
i m not saying that i m glad that these virii exists but it is high time computer users feel responsible towards their PCs. in Mr. C's words..."PC is not television and should not be treated that way".

[Darthtanion]

asklepios,

1- Are you aware of a SUS server version which can keep operating systems from WinXP backwards to Win95 up to date? I'm not aware of one.

2- The systems that are capable of performing automatic updates are set up to perform them.

And while I agree with your quote from Mr. C, you have to think about a corporate environment. The computer being used be these users are their's for daily use, but they aren't their machine. Most could care less if they keep them updated. If it doesn't work the way they think it should, they just call someone. If you can ever come up with a means to educate this type of person to actually take some responsibility for their machine, you would become a very rich man indeed.