Message-ID: <200406171549.i5HFnIB19897@pop-3.dnv.wideopenwest.com>
From: mvp at joeware.net (joe)
Subject: MS Anti Virus?

However the worms would be blocked if people had patched their machine or
otherwise properly administrated the machines they were responsible for. All
of the worms that I think you are probably referring to all had patches well
in advance of the worm that impacted it, blaster, slammer, sasser, etc. 

Home users never should have been impacted as they should be running
firewall software on the internet connections. The fact that they don't
isn't MS's fault, however MS is stepping up with XP SP2 to help out. On top
of that they should be patching when necessary.

Corporate users shouldn't have been impacted either and were only because
the IT department didn't keep the machines patched properly. Too many
companies run on a deploy and forget strategy, this doesn't work for any OS
be it Windows, *nix, or ios. I am not saying keeping them patched is an easy
task, I managed 400 servers in a Fortune 5 company that were distributed
around the world. None of them ran antivirus, none of them got infected by
either viruses nor worms, none of them allowed any but only a small number
of people to have admin rights to do harm to them. When a patch came out
that affected those servers, it was on the machines in a rather quick
fashion, generally within 72 hours depending on testing times. 


Thinking that there will never be code patches required isn't realistic. It
is humans writing the code and even the humans writing the other Oses make
mistakes and need to release patches. If the people who manage the machines
don't take the time to apply the patches then the issue isn't an MS issue,
it is an admin issue. 



> The *real* IT department could then link to the 
> executeable and place it on an intranet server 
> which would be secure.

This is an interesting idea but I can't see how one could do it in a
feasible manner in a large company that is receiving hundreds of thousands
of emails from the outside a day. Also you would have to watch for internal
emails and attachments as well because you could get an infected machine on
the inside. Now in large companies you are up to millions of emails. 

My recommendation to the email manager at the time of the last major
outbreak where they started just stipping all ZIPs from emails was that they
strip ALL attachments that didn't have a specific internally defined
extension on them, that way they knew it was a purposeful thing that that
attachment was there. The extension would be something specific to a company
and people involved know that extension. Obviously this is just a crutch to
block the issue with well known executable file extensions. 

The file associations are a tough thing to repeal since they are so deeply
embedded in how things are done on Windows and people have gotten so used to
them; it made life easier for a majority of the users and was a great idea
at the time. Now however, if you, for instance, removed the DOC extension
from the file associations half the corporate Windows Admins out there would
be at a complete loss as to why Word wasn't working... Those bad Windows
Admins are partially MS's fault, but mostly the fault of companies who look
for cheap admins versus good admins. 

  joe
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Steffen Schumacher [mailto:ssch@...el.dk] 
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 10:43 AM
To: joe
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] MS Anti Virus?


While I have no numbers to back this up, I do think that worms are far worse
when it comes to the extent of which viruses spread, and speed.
It is my belief that most worms are based upon MS exploits, rather then
social engineering. 

It is my belief that we will simply have to wait untill MS cleans up their
act, which they should be doing, before the world becomes a better place to
live.

I realize that this doesn't clear situtations like the one above, but in
general such situations can't really be solved unless all mails are scanned
extensively, and / or the people are educate enough so that they never
should run executeables recieved from mail (its actually quite simple to
me). The *real* IT department could then link to the executeable and place
it on an intranet server which would be secure.

/Steffen

Powered by blists - more mailing lists