http://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/trojan-downloader_osx_flashback_i.shtml
Regards,
T
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 10:30 AM, RandallM randa...@fidmail.com wrote:
can someone tell me what effects there are to being infected with
flashback? signs? google search just brings up the same same news
can someone tell me what effects there are to being infected with
flashback? signs? google search just brings up the same same news
stories.
also, if one is.. it seems there are some files that cannot be
recovered so new install necessary?
--
been great, thanks
RandyM
a.k.a System
http://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/trojan-downloader_osx_flashback_i.shtml
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 9:30 AM, RandallM randa...@fidmail.com wrote:
can someone tell me what effects there are to being infected with
flashback? signs? google search just brings up the same same news
stories.
also, if
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 10:30 AM, RandallM randa...@fidmail.com wrote:
can someone tell me what effects there are to being infected with
flashback? signs? google search just brings up the same same news
stories.
also, if one is.. it seems there are some files that cannot be
recovered so new
On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 03:36:00PM -1000, Peter Besenbruch wrote:
Firefox throws up a download dialog, asking what I should do
with prettyyoungthing.rpm, while a Javascript pop-up explains that to
see these great images, I need to save the file, and type rpm -i
prettyyoungthing.rpm, and
On 11/2/07, reepex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess you never heard of full disk encryption, finger print readers, or
caged machines.
Well, caged machines fall outside of the dont have physical security issue.
Finger Print readers dont have anything to do with Physical Security,
unless they
--On Monday, November 05, 2007 14:54:52 -0400 Dude VanWinkle
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/2/07, reepex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess you never heard of full disk encryption, finger print readers, or
caged machines.
Well, caged machines fall outside of the dont have physical security
you'll be *prompted* for
the root password, not asked to run it as root. Big
difference, and one that many users do not appreciate at all.
Good point. A lot has been made of the number of steps involved, but if you
accept the manifest impossibility that -any- Mac user would ever fall for
On 11/1/07, nnp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm not sure if you accidentally quoted my reply or not there, because
if you did you're completely missing my point. My issue is with the
format and content (or lack thereof) of the first post, I don't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 00:09:33 -0400 RMueller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
of there OS. Move a folder and all programs are gone! Regardless
their
Or, can we educate?
trying.
thanks
np.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Note: This signature can be
NOTE: Resending this was blocked last time.
Profit-driven malware has gotten very good at using Social Engineering
(backed up with Exploits) to spread itself. Zlob and it Codecs are one
particular example that has worked very well on Windows, even by
simply getting the user to install the
I included any exploit that took any end-user's interaction into the 86%
number. I included the list of exploits and what I considered a
client-side attack (versus truly remote) in the article:
http://weblog.infoworld.com/securityadviser/archives/WindowsExploitAnaly
sis.xls
It's not perfect,
Profit-driven malware has gotten very good at using Social Engineering
(backed up with Exploits) to spread itself. Zlob and it Codecs are one
particular example that has worked very well on Windows, even by simply
getting the user to install the software willingly. The
Storm/Zhelatin/Russian
Actually, on that same note, I recently did an analysis of
the last three years of published Windows vulnerabilities.
Thanks, Roger. That's a really useful, apposite and timely item.
--
David Harley
AVIEN Interim Administrator: http://www.avien.org
http://www.smallblue-greenworld.co.uk
Dude VanWinkle wrote:
A program installed under false pretenses that will give the
author/distributer remote access to the victim machines.
Right... Guess those local are not a threat.
-JP
Vranisaprick is that you
--
J. Oquendo
SGFA
On 11/2/07, J. Oquendo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dude VanWinkle wrote:
A program installed under false pretenses that will give the
author/distributer remote access to the victim machines.
Right... Guess those local are not a threat.
?? Local to the machine??
all prevention methods fail
I guess you never heard of full disk encryption, finger print readers, or
caged machines.
On Nov 2, 2007 3:51 PM, Dude VanWinkle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/2/07, J. Oquendo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dude VanWinkle wrote:
A program installed under false pretenses that will give the
I beg to differ, a claymore is a bit large... it would have to be
something a bit smaller, especially if its a laptop.
reepex wrote:
I guess you never heard of full disk encryption, finger print readers,
or caged machines.
On Nov 2, 2007 3:51 PM, Dude VanWinkle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Oh don't be so bloody sensationalist. You're worse than the
journalists because you should know better.
- -nnp
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
Comment: http://firegpg.tuxfamily.org
It is funny that gadi does not post to this list anymore.. maybe its because
he knows people here can actually express their opinion against his retarded
posts without being moderated?
anyway of course gadi is going to jump over stuff like this because it takes
no technical knowledge to write
For whoever didn't hear, there is a Macintosh trojan in-the-wild being
dropped, infecting mac users.
Yes, it is being done by a regular online gang--itw--it is not yet another
proof of concept. The same gang infects Windows machines as well, just
that now they also target macs.
You're an idiot.
Save this as a script and run it, it will give you unlimited power:
#!/bin/sh
sudo rm -rf /
Enter your password if you are prompted.
Oh look, malware.
On Oct 31, 2007, at 5:21 PM, Gadi Evron wrote:
For whoever didn't hear, there is a Macintosh trojan in-the-wild
being
For whoever didn't hear, there is a Macintosh trojan in-the-wild being
dropped, infecting mac users.
Yes, it is being done by a regular online gang--itw--it is not yet
another
proof of concept. The same gang infects Windows machines as well, just
that now they also target macs.
Steven Block to Gadi Evron:
You're an idiot.
Save this as a script and run it, it will give you unlimited power:
#!/bin/sh
sudo rm -rf /
Enter your password if you are prompted.
Oh look, malware.
Were you looking in a mirror while writing that?
If you think there are not roughly
--On Thursday, November 01, 2007 13:27:07 -0600 Steven Block
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're an idiot.
Save this as a script and run it, it will give you unlimited power:
# !/bin/sh
sudo rm -rf /
Enter your password if you are prompted.
Oh look, malware.
If you don't think this is an
On Nov 1, 2007 4:34 PM, Nick FitzGerald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, today, the average level of clue among Mac users is probably a
shade higher than amongst Windows users,
Is this a joke? The reason people switch to macs is because they cannot
handle simple tasks. Isnt the main thing said
--On Thursday, November 01, 2007 16:42:51 -0500 reepex [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Nov 1, 2007 4:34 PM, Nick FitzGerald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, today, the average level of clue among Mac users is probably a
shade higher than amongst Windows users,
Is this a joke? The reason
I will take that pepsi challenge... what is at stake ;)
On Nov 1, 2007 4:50 PM, Paul Schmehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--On Thursday, November 01, 2007 16:42:51 -0500 reepex [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Nov 1, 2007 4:34 PM, Nick FitzGerald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Yes, today, the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
There's a difference between ignoring something and making a statement like
'OS X is the new Windows 98.'
Its sensationalist and of no use, especially when posted to lists that
are supposedly populated with security experts. Everyone here is aware
reepex to me:
Yes, today, the average level of clue among Mac users is probably a
shade higher than amongst Windows users,
Is this a joke? The reason people switch to macs is because they cannot
handle simple tasks. Isnt the main thing said by new mac users is 'it just
works' meaning
On 11/1/07, nnp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
There's a difference between ignoring something and making a statement like
'OS X is the new Windows 98.'
OK How about iPhone is the new Win9x? It is running a type of OSX,
one that is configured to use
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm not sure if you accidentally quoted my reply or not there, because
if you did you're completely missing my point. My issue is with the
format and content (or lack thereof) of the first post, I don't think
I mentioned the iPhone, *BSD, MS or at any
On Wednesday 31 October 2007 13:21:00 Gadi Evron wrote:
This means one thing: Apple's day has finally come and Apple users are
going to get hit hard. All those unpatched vulnerabilities from years past
are going to bite them in the behind.
I can sum it up in one sentence: OS X is the new
On 10/31/07, Gadi Evron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For whoever didn't hear, there is a Macintosh trojan in-the-wild being
dropped, infecting mac users.
Yes, it is being done by a regular online gang--itw--it is not yet another
proof of concept. The same gang infects Windows machines as well,
Let's not over-hype this-- while Apple's day has been coming, saying
that users will be hit hard on something the user has to
manually download, manually execute, and explicitly grant
administrative privileges to is *way* over the top.
The future of malware is going to be largely through
So if i put a picture of a naked girl on a website and said to see more you
must open a terminal and enter rm -rf.
Would we consider this a trojan...or just stupidity?
On 11/1/07, Alex Eckelberry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's not over-hype this-- while Apple's day has been coming, saying
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Jim Harrison wrote:
While Apple-oriented threats may not get either the validation or the
publicity (on hardly equals the other) that Windows attacks do, it's hardly
accurate (much less fair) to make those comparisons.
For all those comparative points, my Kaypro-4 running
Actually, on that same note, I recently did an analysis of the last
three years of published Windows vulnerabilities.
86% required local end-user interaction (i.e. social engineering) to be
pulled off.
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/10/19/42OPsecadvise-insider-threats_
1.html
I didn't
Heh-heh; he said Steve Gibson; heh-heh-heh
Seriously; Tim is right.
While Apple-oriented threats may not get either the validation or the publicity
(on hardly equals the other) that Windows attacks do, it's hardly accurate
(much less fair) to make those comparisons.
For all those comparative
On Thursday 01 November 2007 11:49:09 Alex Eckelberry wrote:
The future of malware is going to be largely through social engineering.
Does that mean we ignore every threat that comes out because it requires
user interaction? Seems like whistling past the graveyard to me.
Alex, no-one is
That's an interesting figure (86% that is). Can you give us some
insight into what you define as user interaction?
If it is clicking a link or reading an HTML email, then OK. If it is
opening an .exe from an email, I'd like to see what client you are
talking about and what environment (meaning,
--On November 1, 2007 3:36:00 PM -1000 Peter Besenbruch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Firefox throws up a download dialog, asking what I should do
with prettyyoungthing.rpm, while a Javascript pop-up explains that to
see these great images, I need to save the file, and type rpm -i
--On November 1, 2007 6:31:39 PM -0400 Adam St. Onge
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if i put a picture of a naked girl on a website and said to see more
you must open a terminal and enter rm -rf.
Would we consider this a trojan...or just stupidity?
I would consider it stupidity to think that
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Adam St. Onge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if i put a picture of a naked girl on a website and said to see more you
must open a terminal and enter rm -rf.
Would we consider this a trojan...or just stupidity?
Yes, a Trojan. Yes, stupidity on the part of the designer of
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Paul Schmehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--On November 1, 2007 6:31:39 PM -0400 Adam St. Onge
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if i put a picture of a naked girl on a website and said to see more
you must open a terminal and enter rm -rf.
Would we consider this a
--On November 1, 2007 10:14:50 PM -0400 Jay Sulzberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Paul Schmehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--On November 1, 2007 6:31:39 PM -0400 Adam St. Onge
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if i put a picture of a naked girl on a website and said to see
more
--On November 1, 2007 10:14:50 PM -0400 Jay Sulzberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Paul Schmehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--On November 1, 2007 6:31:39 PM -0400 Adam St. Onge
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if i put a picture of a naked girl on a website and said to see more
you
--On November 1, 2007 4:53:12 PM -1000 Peter Besenbruch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
There is no need to do that. In both Macs and Gnome or KDE on Unix, if
you try to run rpm -i (of whatever the install paradigm is on your
flavor of OS), you'll be *prompted* for the root password, not asked to
run
On Thursday 01 November 2007 16:13:10 Paul Schmehl wrote:
--On November 1, 2007 3:36:00 PM -1000 Peter Besenbruch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Firefox throws up a download dialog, asking what I should do
with prettyyoungthing.rpm, while a Javascript pop-up explains that to
see these great
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Thor (Hammer of God) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's an interesting figure (86% that is). Can you give us some
insight into what you define as user interaction?
If it is clicking a link or reading an HTML email, then OK. If it is
opening an .exe from an email, I'd
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Paul Schmehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--On November 1, 2007 10:14:50 PM -0400 Jay Sulzberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Paul Schmehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--On November 1, 2007 6:31:39 PM -0400 Adam St. Onge
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if i
I read a lot of babel on this subject. The point is simple...they are users as
much as PC folks. Friends, I serve both, and there is not much difference. 15
years doing the same damn job and they still can't add a printer regardless
of there OS. Move a folder and all programs are gone! Regardless
Adam St. Onge wrote:
So if i put a picture of a naked girl on a website and said to see more you
must open a terminal and enter rm -rf.
Would we consider this a trojan...or just stupidity?
That would be just stupidity, to use your terminology.
Trojan functionality is a feature of the code of
53 matches
Mail list logo
