Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-30 Thread Iljitsch van Beijnum
On 30-jan-04, at 7:20, Alexei Roudnev wrote:

Second problem is directory structure. In Unix, when I configure IDS 
(osiris
or Tripwire or Intact), I can just be sure, that 'bin' and 'etc' and 
'sbin'
and 'libexec' directories does not have any variable files - all 
non-static
files are in /var (Solaris is an exception, they put some 'pid files 
into
.etc, but even here, it is not a problem). But windose... you have not 
any
directory which never changed, and I find few .dll files, changed 
every few
days. Every application puts log  and data files into it's own 
directory
(with rare exception of applications, derived from Unix or written by 
people
with Unix background). It makes terrible difficult to configure IDS, 
and
makes system very vulnerable.
Actually IMO putting all their crap in their own dir is a feature 
rather than a bug. I really hate the way unix apps just put their stuff 
all over the place so it's an incredible pain to get rid of it again.

I think MacOS got it right: for most apps, installing just means 
dumping the icon wherever you want it to be, deinstalling is done by 
dropping it in the trash. The fact that the icon hides a directory with 
a bunch of different files in it is transparent to the user.

And if an installer wants to mess with the system, a request to provide 
the administrator password comes up, even for users with administrator 
privilidges.

Of course, it is all trade-off for functionality, but people 
overestimates
it - many MS benefits come from it's dominance , not from 
functionality.
I think MS's tradeoffs are mainly time to market vs even faster time to 
market. Hopefully they'll rip off Apple's ideas for their new stuff. 
Then add some zone alarm like stuff so apps can't mess with the network 
without the user's permission and we're in pretty good shape.

And it all makes it a very good target for the viruses / worms.
The fact that SMTP believes everything you tell it doesn't help either.



Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-30 Thread Vadim Antonov

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

 Actually IMO putting all their crap in their own dir is a feature 
 rather than a bug. I really hate the way unix apps just put their stuff 
 all over the place so it's an incredible pain to get rid of it again.

Putting all crap in the working directory is bad design (no way to 
separate read-only stuff from mutable). Unix/Linux design (all over the 
place) is pure and simple lack of discipline, or hack before thinking 
approach.

Plan 9 nearly got it right, but for the lack of persistent mounts (it's 
all in an rc file, executed at each login).

 I think MacOS got it right: for most apps, installing just means 
 dumping the icon wherever you want it to be, deinstalling is done by 
 dropping it in the trash. The fact that the icon hides a directory with 
 a bunch of different files in it is transparent to the user.

That's UI.  Inside it's the same Unix crap.
 
 I think MS's tradeoffs are mainly time to market vs even faster time to 
 market.

It's mostly We don't care, we don't have to, we're The Microsoft 
mentality.

--vadim



Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-29 Thread Alexei Roudnev



 Most Windows boxes are running with administrative privledges.  That makes
 Windows a willing accomplice.  The issue isn't that people click on
 attachments, but that there are no built in safeguards from what happens
 next.
This is problem #1. Unfortunately, Windose is too complex and have too much
legacy, so everyone must run as a administrator (try to install Visio
without admin privileges...).

Problem #2 - using extentions to select an application - may be, it's a very
good idea, but it complicates virus (worm) problem.

Problemm #3 - Monoculture.





Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-29 Thread Scott McGrath


On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Alexei Roudnev wrote:

 
 
 
  Most Windows boxes are running with administrative privledges.  That makes
  Windows a willing accomplice.  The issue isn't that people click on
  attachments, but that there are no built in safeguards from what happens
  next.
 This is problem #1. Unfortunately, Windose is too complex and have too much
 legacy, so everyone must run as a administrator (try to install Visio
 without admin privileges...).

The whole point of the infamous *.DLL was to provide local libraries for 
applications like unix *.lib.so files.   This was corrupted by app vendors 
who were too deadline focused to install their DLL's in the application 
directory.

Of course this was abetted by the ability of an application to write
into the system directories.

When NTFS came out an ordinary user could not write the system directory
tree Hence most users are running as Administrator or equivalent so that
they can write into the system tree.  This was a bad design decision by
MS _and_ application developers.   This _is_ fixable by MS by simply not 
allowing apps to write into the system tree.  This of course is a small 
matter of programming but it would really improve the overall security 
posture of Windows.

Now there are well written applications which do install their DLL's into 
their own tree these apps can usually be recognized by _not_ requiring a 
reboot after installation.   

 
 Problem #2 - using extentions to select an application - may be, it's a very
 good idea, but it complicates virus (worm) problem.
 
 Agreed
 However magic numbers in the header or having the execute permission bit 
 set bring the same problem to the table.
 

 Problemm #3 - Monoculture.
  This greatly exacerbates problems 1 and 2 but is not so much of a 
  problem on its own.  i.e. Apache which has over 75% of the webserver
  market and is infrequently compromised.


Problem #4

MS applications have an unfortunate predilection to run any bit of 
executable code they find.  i.e. a WMA file can contain executable code 
which media player will happily execute.   This is a perfect example of 
just because you can do something it does not necessarily follow that you 
_should_ do something.   This dates back to [*]BASIC and the RUN command.  
It was somewhat useful 10+ years ago not so much today.




Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-29 Thread kenw

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 07:41:20 -0500 (EST), you wrote:

...
When NTFS came out an ordinary user could not write the system directory
tree Hence most users are running as Administrator or equivalent so that
they can write into the system tree.  This was a bad design decision by
MS _and_ application developers.   This _is_ fixable by MS by simply not 
allowing apps to write into the system tree.  This of course is a small 
matter of programming but it would really improve the overall security 
posture of Windows.

Now there are well written applications which do install their DLL's into 
their own tree these apps can usually be recognized by _not_ requiring a 
reboot after installation.   
...

Actually, it's more of an issue in the registry than the file system; older
apps tend to want to write the global HKLM, rather than the user-specific
HKCU.

But, regardless, Win2K and WinXP do have restricted-user modes that tie
this stuff down quite well.  They tend to be used in corporate
environments.  But for home users, it gets to be a pain in the butt,
because it prevents a lot of things users want to do, like installing
games, multimedia apps and spyware.

You can't really have it both ways; if you can install apps, you can
install viruses and trojans.  I don't see this being much different
regardless of the OS you run.  And until you have earned some battle scars,
you're not afraid of the pretty toys.

It would be nice, though, if there were a legitimate 'su' analog in Windows
-- sorry, runas doesn't cut it.  Makes it hard to normally run
restricted, and explicitly enable temporary privs sometimes...

/kenw
Ken Wallewein
KM Systems Integration
Phone (403)274-7848
Fax   (403)275-4535
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.kmsi.net


RE: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-29 Thread Michel Py

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 But, regardless, Win2K and WinXP do have restricted-user
 modes that tie this stuff down quite well.  They tend to
 be used in corporate environments.

Indeed, and the one reason being that the last thing the IT staff wants
is users installing apps, because even if the user is not installing a
worm or Trojan, installing software inevitably generates
incompatibilities and demand for more support.

 But for home users, it gets to be a pain in the butt,
 because it prevents a lot of things users want to do,
 like installing games, multimedia apps and spyware.

Yep. In XP home, it's easy to have several users on the same machine but
by default they all have administrative rights.


 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Microsoft software is inherently less safe than
 Linux/*BSD software.
 This is because Microsoft has favored usability
 over security.
 This is because the market has responded better
 to that tradeoff.
 This is because your mom doesn't want to have to
 hire a technical consultant to manage her IT
 infrastructure when all she wants to do is get
 email pictures of her grandkids.

Exactly.

Michel.



Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-28 Thread Martin Hepworth
Dave Temkin wrote:
snip
So?  Had the virii been an application compiled for RedHat and
everyone ran RedHat instead of Windows and they downloaded it using
Evolution and double clicked on it, it would suddenly be RH's fault
instead of MIcrosoft's?  Or is it sendmail's fault because it was
listening on port 25 and allowed the worm to connect to it?  Newsflash:
Even those using Netscape Mail, Lotus Notes, etc. on the PC were still
potentially infected due to the nesting of the virii.
The worm was not spread through any vulnerability in the operating system,
unlike NIMDA/SQLSlammer/etc.  This worm was propogated through pure user stupidity, and
that'll follow any operating system that Dell/Gateway pre-installs for
them.  If everyone wants to flame MS, at least do it in a way that doesn't
show your own ignorance.
-Dave
OT
to me the problem is one of a mono culture. Too much of the same stuff 
everywhere.

doesn't matter if it's MS-Windows. MacOS X or Debian GNU/Linux or bacon 
and eggs - too much of the same is bad for you..

/OT

--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300
**

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.
This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept
for the presence of computer viruses and is believed to be clean.
**



Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-28 Thread james

: So?  Had the virii been an application compiled for RedHat and
: everyone ran RedHat instead of Windows and they downloaded it using
: Evolution and double clicked on it, it would suddenly be RH's fault
: instead of MIcrosoft's? 

I suspect the skill set/clue of RH users is at least an order
higher that windows users.

The main problem I see is many e-mail readers default to having
the preview plain open and this will then run any app it finds.
No clicking required.

James Edwards
Routing and Security Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
At the Santa Fe Office: Internet at Cyber Mesa
Store hours: 9-6 Monday through Friday
505-988-9200 SIP:1(747)669-1965


 



OT: Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-28 Thread Scott Weeks




It's not completely the fault of anything except the end-user.  It's like
the Jimmy Buffet song says:

   Evolution is mean, there's no dumbass vaccine

scott

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Dave Temkin wrote:

:  : They rate of it is quite surprising.  By the description, the trick
:  : method of infection does not seem all that different than past worms
:  : viri.  Makes me wonder how many people in a room would reach into
:   : their purse/pocket on hearing, Wallet inspector
: 
:  Every single person that still opens these damn attachments! :-(
: 
: IN WINDOWS!
:
: So?  Had the virii been an application compiled for RedHat and
: everyone ran RedHat instead of Windows and they downloaded it using
: Evolution and double clicked on it, it would suddenly be RH's fault
: instead of MIcrosoft's?  Or is it sendmail's fault because it was
: listening on port 25 and allowed the worm to connect to it?  Newsflash:
: Even those using Netscape Mail, Lotus Notes, etc. on the PC were still
: potentially infected due to the nesting of the virii.
:
: The worm was not spread through any vulnerability in the operating system,
: unlike NIMDA/SQLSlammer/etc.  This worm was propogated through pure user stupidity, 
and
: that'll follow any operating system that Dell/Gateway pre-installs for
: them.  If everyone wants to flame MS, at least do it in a way that doesn't
: show your own ignorance.
:
:
: -Dave
:



Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-28 Thread Patrick W . Gilmore
On Jan 28, 2004, at 11:56 AM, james wrote:

: So?  Had the virii been an application compiled for RedHat and
: everyone ran RedHat instead of Windows and they downloaded it using
: Evolution and double clicked on it, it would suddenly be RH's fault
: instead of MIcrosoft's?
I suspect the skill set/clue of RH users is at least an order
higher that windows users.
The main problem I see is many e-mail readers default to having
the preview plain open and this will then run any app it finds.
No clicking required.
Not sure why that is the case.  Web browsers know better than to 
execute things, or at least to execute them in a sandbox, and there 
seems to be much more abuse capabilities in IE / Netscape than 
$RandomMailReader.

How hard is it to tell a mail reader NEVER execute a binary?  If 
someone really wants to run a program that was e-mailed to them, they 
can save the attachment and run it outside the mail reader or 
something.  So things like virus.doc.exe won't get executed by $luser 
who thinks it was a word doc.

There are ways around this (copy/paste an executable into a word doc, 
then type Click here! in the Word doc), but it might help.

Might :)

--
TTFN,
patrick


Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-28 Thread Alexei Roudnev

RedHAT do not allow to run an attachment, even if attachment wish to be
runned - it uses 'x' flag which is not attachment's attribute. Linus useers
are niot Administrator's, so virus can not infect the whole system,... Etc
etc

(Why RedHAT? It is the worst Lunux amongs all. Use SuSe or Mandrake).



 
 
 
  : They rate of it is quite surprising.  By the description, the trick
  /
  : method of infection does not seem all that different than past worms
  : viri.  Makes me wonder how many people in a room would reach into
 their
  : purse/pocket on hearing, Wallet inspector
 
 
  Every single person that still opens these damn attachments! :-(
 IN WINDOWS!

 So?  Had the virii been an application compiled for RedHat and
 everyone ran RedHat instead of Windows and they downloaded it using
 Evolution and double clicked on it, it would suddenly be RH's fault
 instead of MIcrosoft's?  Or is it sendmail's fault because it was
 listening on port 25 and allowed the worm to connect to it?  Newsflash:
 Even those using Netscape Mail, Lotus Notes, etc. on the PC were still
 potentially infected due to the nesting of the virii.

 The worm was not spread through any vulnerability in the operating system,
 unlike NIMDA/SQLSlammer/etc.  This worm was propogated through pure user
stupidity, and
 that'll follow any operating system that Dell/Gateway pre-installs for
 them.  If everyone wants to flame MS, at least do it in a way that doesn't
 show your own ignorance.


 -Dave



Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-28 Thread Rachael Treu

On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 12:07:36PM -0500, Patrick W.Gilmore said something to the 
effect of:
 
 On Jan 28, 2004, at 11:56 AM, james wrote:
 Not sure why that is the case.  Web browsers know better than to 
 execute things, or at least to execute them in a sandbox, and there 
 seems to be much more abuse capabilities in IE / Netscape than 
 $RandomMailReader.
 
 How hard is it to tell a mail reader NEVER execute a binary?  If 

w00t. 

 someone really wants to run a program that was e-mailed to them, they 
 can save the attachment and run it outside the mail reader or 
 something.  So things like virus.doc.exe won't get executed by $luser 
 who thinks it was a word doc.

I don't think it's that it's hard, so much as inconvenient.  
C-level-officer types ;) want point-and-click to open and launch, 
not to be ordered to port and manipulate attachments to access them.  
And since that might be too much effort...heck...why not give users 
a peep-hole preview function that allows them to split the screen and 
peak into the email without clicking on anything at all?  Back-office 
IT heads would roll if that went away...

We _can_ thank M$ for setting the bar on this one; no one expected 
irresponsible features like instant access to attached goodies until 
the Internet-for-Idiots and SMTP-for-the-generally-challenged 
revolutions were ushered in to the sounds of Where do you want to go 
today, and how much do you want to break/spend/consume while you're 
there?

I wish I could end this with Friends don't let friends use Outlook,
but I have to agree that the fault still lies primarily in the users
that continually refuse to heed the warnings of 
  A) shut that preview pain^N^Nne shee-yit off
  B) don't execute attachments in email, even/especially if it looks
like it might be a really k00l screen saver...

Long live mutt.  ;)

ymmv,
--ra
-- 
K. Rachael Treu, CISSP [EMAIL PROTECTED]
..this email has been brought to you by the letters 'v' and 'i'..


 
 There are ways around this (copy/paste an executable into a word doc, 
 then type Click here! in the Word doc), but it might help.
 
 Might :)
 
 -- 
 TTFN,
 patrick




Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-28 Thread Lou Katz

Unfortunately, Microsoft products seem to have a default which is set to hide
file extensions and to make it very difficult to see 'multiple extensions' like
the '.docmany spaces.pif' in the current worm, it is somewhat easier to dress
a vampire in gerbil clothing in these systems than in others.

-- 
-=[L]=-


Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-28 Thread Dave Temkin

On Wednesday 28 January 2004 08:37, Dave Temkin  wrote:
 So?  Had the virii been an application compiled for RedHat and
 everyone ran RedHat instead of Windows and they downloaded it using
 Evolution and double clicked on it, it would suddenly be RH's fault
 instead of MIcrosoft's?

If RedHat, by default had you running as root rather than an unprivledged
user, it sure would be.

Most Windows boxes are running with administrative privledges.  That
makes
Windows a willing accomplice.  The issue isn't that people click on
attachments, but that there are no built in safeguards from what happens
next.

--
Robin Lynn Frank | Director of Operations | Paradigm-Omega, LLC Cry
havoc,
and let slip the dogs of war! Email acceptance policy:
http://paradigm-omega.com/email_policy.php


You're the second person to say that and it's still wrong.  The virii,
once resident, opens a connection to port 25 on an open SMTP server,
whether it be the user's ISP relay or local server.  Sure, it can't
install itself into /etc/init.d, but it sure can launch itself bg instead
of fg and be running until the user either kills it or reboots the box.

Also, for reference to other people - the preview pane does *not* allow
the execution of attachments unless they're double-clicked on and
acknowledged.  Again - we're not talking about another OS or Outlook
exploit, only a stupid user exploit.


-- 
David Temkin


Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-28 Thread james

: Also, for reference to other people - the preview pane does *not* allow
: the execution of attachments unless they're double-clicked on and
: acknowledged.  Again - we're not talking about another OS or Outlook
: exploit, only a stupid user exploit.

The feature has been fixed but it **did** at one point run apps.

James Edwards
Routing and Security Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
At the Santa Fe Office: Internet at Cyber Mesa
Store hours: 9-6 Monday through Friday
505-988-9200 SIP:1(747)669-1965



Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-28 Thread Dave Temkin


: Also, for reference to other people - the preview pane does *not*
allow
: the execution of attachments unless they're double-clicked on and
: acknowledged.  Again - we're not talking about another OS or Outlook
: exploit, only a stupid user exploit.

The feature has been fixed but it **did** at one point run apps.

James Edwards
Routing and Security Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
At the Santa Fe Office: Internet at Cyber Mesa
Store hours: 9-6 Monday through Friday
505-988-9200 SIP:1(747)669-1965


Right, and at multiple points bind and sendmail allowed the execution of
code from remote systems without the system owner interacting at all.
What's that got to do with today?


-- 
David Temkin


Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-28 Thread james

: What's that got to do with today?


I might be reaching here, but I understand some people never upgrade or patch.


Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-28 Thread Dave Temkin





 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
 james
 Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 4:02 PM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed
 it, there was a mail worm released today



 : What's that got to do with today?


 I might be reaching here, but I understand some people never upgrade or
 patch.


True, but that happens regardless of the OS.  I'm sure if we looked really
hard we could find some ancient versions of bind  or sendmail (complete
with open relays (speak of old bad defaults...)


Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail worm released today

2004-01-28 Thread Stephen J. Wilcox

 I suspect the skill set/clue of RH users is at least an order
 higher that windows users.

really, based on experience that would be surprising, rh is now so easy to get 
and install, securing it is still problematic for most users

 The main problem I see is many e-mail readers default to having
 the preview plain open and this will then run any app it finds.
 No clicking required.

hmm i've not checked, i thought this virus came as executables so you need to 
click a couple boxes before it will run,.

Steve

 
 James Edwards
 Routing and Security Administrator
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 At the Santa Fe Office: Internet at Cyber Mesa
 Store hours: 9-6 Monday through Friday
 505-988-9200 SIP:1(747)669-1965