Thread: New Conficker variant to come on April 1

Microsoft has a nice Knowledgebase (specifically for Conficker.C worm) that may be helpful as well.

Here's the link http://support.microsoft.com/kb/962007

Also it's been mentioned that the Conficker worm, although while dormant will not allow a user to access www.microsoft.com , www.symantec.com or www.us.mcafee.com. Make sure you have accessibility to either of these as well.

--Edit-- If you're on an Apple system or running a Linux based system then you're pretty much immune from this particular virus, nothing to worry about.

I laughed at "This must be a joke", and it isn't even April's fools yet!

Originally Posted by Switch

--Edit-- If you're on an Apple system or running a Linux based system then you're pretty much immune from this particular virus, nothing to worry about.

what do you mean "this particular virus".....?

Anyway, survival of the fittest
Ready!
Go!


*edit*
On a serious note,
£10 says nothing happens tomorrow

The threat is very real
but I just don't trust this "1st April" date

Originally Posted by Ynot

what do you mean "this particular virus".....?

I put it that way because Linux and Apple are not completely immune from viruses at all. No one is writing malicious code for them because of the user group numbers compared to windows based user groups numbers. If I were a hacker, chances are I would not write a virus for an OS that many people do not use. I'd try to do the most wide-spread damage as possible and to as many people as possible.

However I do think that one of the biggest vulnerabilities of Linux and Apple is that many users think it is not vulnerable to viruses.

Originally Posted by Switch

I put it that way because Linux and Apple are not completely immune from viruses at all. No one is writing malicious code for them because of the user group numbers compared to windows based user groups numbers. If I were a hacker, chances are I would not write a virus for an OS that many people do not use. I'd try to do the most

I don't want to sound arrogant,
but that's simply not true


*edit*
Google runs on Linux
Most banks run on Linux (the rest are proprietary UNIX)
The NSA runs Linux
etc.
etc.
etc.
basically, anything of any real importance runs a *nix OS

You think targeting someone's desktop machine is more valuable than targeting server farms and core infrastructure?
Desktop machines are small fry

Compromise a bank system and zero everyone's account
That'd be impressive

Originally Posted by Ynot

Compromise a bank system and zero everyone's account
That'd be impressive

Exactly. That'd be impressive. Black hat hackers / malicious code writers (to call it that) don't really care that much about impressing, I think. By infecting tens of thousands of desktops they can also get the credit card data etc., and that's without trying to hack into an effin' bank.

Of course core infrastructure, server farms etc etc are way more important and are a way bigger deal, but that's exactly it - it's a way bigger deal. Infecting tens of thousands of desktops is easy (all relative of course) and you can also get a fuckload of money if you play it right.

That's not to say they can get away with it that easily, especially if they empty a shitload of bank accounts. But that's not exactly how it works.

Originally Posted by TweaK

Infecting tens of thousands of desktops is easy

indeed,
but it's only easy due to the OS of 85% of desktop machines

seriously,
Windows is targeted because Windows in inherently insecure
no more, no less

Also,
http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/188

You're right in regards to everything you've mentioned but it doesn't disregard that a Linux based system is vunerable also. They are not as vunerable as windows but in the same retrospect it is vunerable. Because I am 100% sure that Google, The NSA and Most banks who are running Linux are running some kind of AV software. You don't know if you're going to get in an accident but you buckle up for your safety when you get into your car just in case, because it could happen and cars has crashed before.

There is no Anti-Virus software that scans for Linux viruses
because there are no Linux viruses in the wild

Anti-Virus software for Linux scans for Windows viruses
they are designed to be used on mail gateways and file servers which serve Windows clients

While not vulnerable to infections themselves, Linux machines can play a part in virus propagation

One Windows client can infect another Windows client, by sending a nasty email through a Linux mail server

*nix machines are only vulnerable to unauthorised access

Originally Posted by Ynot

There is no Anti-Virus software that scans for Linux viruses
because there are no Linux viruses in the wild

Symantec has had an several AV's specifically for linux platforms for the past 7 or 8 years.

Originally Posted by Ynot

Anti-Virus software for Linux scans for Windows viruses
they are designed to be used on mail gateways and file servers which serve Windows clients

The AV software I've seen scanned files in the ELF format. I cannot remember the name of it but I will definately find it and link it to back up what I'm saying. All I'm saying Ynot is that Linux is not invunerable, there are viruses that has been written specifically for Linux in the past and there will be more written in the future.