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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4045F222.8060901@onryou.com> From: lists2 at onryou.com (Cael Abal) Subject: Backdoor not recognized by Kaspersky >> Another variant against the Netsky virus. It's is packed with >> UPX. It spreads with the password protected zip file, which >> gets bypassed through all most all the AV scanners with >> latest signature updates because No AV can decrypt it >> without the password. (though password is in the message >> content), we humans tend to open it after reading the message. > > Kaspersky, NAI and possibly some other AV-vendors now parse the password > from the body of the email to extract the zip and then scan it. > Obviously this only helps if it can scan the complete email i.e. on the > mailserver. They might need to adapt to new varitions of how the > password is included in the body, which will take some analysis when new > variants emerge. Does anyone else find this new development a bad idea? I'm of the mindset that anti-virus companies should stick with what they're good at -- namely, detecting and handling infected files. It seems a bad idea to start down the natural language processing road. Are they scanning just for Bagle/Beagle style e-mail, or are their methods more general? What about messages of the form: 'Password is a long yellow fruit enjoyed by monkeys.' What about messages in languages other than English? I can easily see this becoming an arms-race, and one the anti-virus folks have no chance of winning. Leave passworded .zips alone -- take the sensible approach and catch an infected file once it's been extracted. Cael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists