home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- VIRUS-L Digest Thursday, 4 May 1989 Volume 2 : Issue 105
-
- Today's Topics:
- Virus - worm combinations: A future trend?
- Virus Plurals
- Chroma trojan horse (PC)
- checksum algorythm
- (c) Brain ?????????? (PC)
- old question - AV software info request (PC)
- Possible virus, info request (PC)
- Boot viruses - forwarded from HomeBase (PC)
-
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- Date: Sun, 30 Apr 89 16:02:48 +0200
- From: David Stodolsky <stodol@diku.dk>
- Subject: Virus - worm combinations: A future trend?
-
- Joe Sieczkowski <joes@scarecrow.csee.Lehigh.EDU> in "RE: Review of THE
- COMPUTER VIRUS CRISIS," Virus-L Digest, 2(93), points out that the
- definition offered distinguishing between virii and worms in "Review
- of THE COMPUTER VIRUS CRISIS" (Mark Paulk <mcp@SEI.CMU.EDU> Virus-L
- Digest, 2(92)) is not that accurate. Joe adds "If the [worm] program
- had modified the actual sendmail and fingerd (sic) executables in such
- a way that they would in turn modify other machines S&F executables,
- then it could be called a virus."
-
- The threat posed by virus - worm combinations was previously mentioned
- in "Net hormones: Part 1 - Infection control assuming cooperation
- among computers." The relevant paragraph reads:
-
- "An inapparent infection could spread rapidly, with damage noted only
- much later. Consider a worm that is constructed to carry a virus. The
- worm infects a system, installs the virus and then infects other
- nearby systems on the net. Finally, it terminates erasing evidence of
- its existence on the first system. The virus is also inapparent, it
- waits for the right moment writes some bits and then terminates
- destroying evidence of its existence. Later the worm retraces its path
- reads some bits, then writes some bits and exits. The point is that an
- inapparent infection could spread quite widely before it was noticed.
- It also might be so hard to determine whether a system was infected or
- not, that it would not be done until damage was either immanent or
- apparent. This analysis suggests response to network-wide problems
- would best be on a network level." (Citation: Stodolsky, D. (1989).
- Net hormones: Part 1 - Infection control assuming cooperation among
- computers [Machine- readable file]. van Wyk, K. R. (1989, March 30).
- Several reports available via anonymous FTP. Virus-L Digest, 2(77,
- Article 1). Abstract republished in van Wyk, K. R. (1989, April 24).
- Virus papers (finally) available on Lehigh LISTSERV. Virus-L Digest,
- 2(98, Article 4). (Available via anonymous file transfer protocol from
- LLL-WINKEN.LLNL.GOV: File name "~ftp/virus-l/docs/net.hormones" and
- IBM1.CC.LEHIGH.EDU: File name "HORMONES NET". And by electronic mail
- from LISTSERV@LEHIIBM1.BITNET: File name "HORMONES NET")).
-
- In January I started writing a paper, "Virus infected worms in
- information machines." The virus - worm combination has both negative
- and positive implications. In the biological world, virii have been
- very effective in controlling bacteria that cause disease in farm
- animals, etc. So far, the only thing I have seen like this for
- computers is the "KillVirus" init. As discussed earlier, it is a
- "virus" that overwrites and thereby destroys an invading one. The key
- problem seems to be how to develop a virus that has no negative
- affects, except on an invading agent. Are there any wizards, virus
- writers, etc. who will accept this challenge?
-
- - --------
- David Stodolsky Routing: <@uunet.uu.net:stodol@diku.dk>
- Department of Psychology Internet: <stodol@diku.dk>
- Copenhagen Univ., Njalsg. 88 Voice + 45 1 58 48 86
- DK-2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark Fax. + 45 1 54 32 11
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Tue, 02 May 89 12:15:45 EDT
- From: "Gregory E. Gilbert" <C0195@UNIVSCVM.BITNET>
- Subject: Virus Plurals
-
- For all of you out there who might be confused between:
-
- viruses
- viri or
- virii.
-
- According to the Second College Edition of The American Heritage
- Dictionary the correct plural form of virus (drum roll please.......)
-
- viruses .
-
- Please note that I will not be offended if any of the others are used,
- nor should this message be conceived as snobby or condescending, I was
- curious as to which is the "preferred" plural form and thought that
- others out there in virusland (or is that viriland, viriiland,
- virusesland ?????) might want to know also.
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Tue, 02 May 89 14:21:51 -0700
- From: Steve Clancy <SLCLANCY@UCI.BITNET>
- Subject: Chroma trojan horse (PC)
-
- This is a short bulletin that I recently posted on our BBS. I want to
- emphasize that I DO NOT have all the facts, and am not trying to start
- a wild rumor. The user who informed me of this possible trojan horse
- (as opposed to a virus) is reliable. -- Steve Clancy
-
- Original-April, 19th, 1989. Irvine, CA.
-
- TROJAN HORSE ALERT!
-
- John Cook of the French Connection BBS, just informed me of a possible
- Trojan Horse that has surfaced in this area. Details are sketchy.
- All I have to go on is what he told me.
-
- Evidently, someone downloaded a file called "HARDCORE.ARC" which
- contained a file called either "CHROMA.EXE" or "CHROMA.COM." This
- person ran the program, and it displayed something approximating the
- following message on the screen:
-
- "The worst possible thing has just happened to your hard disk!"
-
- I don't have details on exactly what happened to this person's hard
- disk, but at very least the TH seems to have erased all files.
-
- Again, details are very sketchy at this point, but John is a reliable
- source. As more info becomes available, I will update this bulletin.
-
- Steve Clancy, Wellspring RBBS, 714-856-7996, 714-856-5087
- U.C. Irvine, California, USA.
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Tue, 2 May 89 11:01:45 CDT
- From: "Len Levine" <len@evax.milw.wisc.EDU>
- Subject: checksum algorythm
-
- In an earlier Virus-l dmg@mwunix.mitre.org states:
-
- >I believe it is possible to use a checkfunction in a constructive
- >manner to detect even the most advanced computer viruses, and it
- >involves a technique called a "cryptographic checkfunction".
-
- It is fairly easy to use a even simple CRC with a non-standard
- polynomial to fool any arbitrary virus. There is no way that a virus
- writer can determine what polynomial you are using, as the program
- that does the ckecking need not be stored in any special place on the
- system for the virus to check against. As long as you use a
- polynomial for the CRC that is not published, no virus can match it.
-
- + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +
- | Leonard P. Levine e-mail len@evax.milw.wisc.edu |
- | Professor, Computer Science Office (414) 229-5170 |
- | University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Home (414) 962-4719 |
- | Milwaukee, WI 53201 U.S.A. Modem (414) 962-6228 |
- + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Wed, 03 May 89 13:12:35 CDT
- From: Michael K. Blackstock <ELTRUT@MSSTATE.BITNET>
- Subject: (c) Brain ?????????? (PC)
-
- I am a student at Mississippi State Univ. and some of the computer
- disks around here are getting odd data on them. All of the disk that
- I have seen have the label (c)Brain. Doen any one out there know what
- this is, is it a anti-virus or is it a virus itself?
-
- I look at the disk with a program called Master Key and I found this
- in sector number 0.
-
- < J.4 Welcome to the Dungeon (c) 1986 Brain. & Amjads (pvt)
- < Ltd VIRUS_SHOE RECORD v9.0 Dedicated to the dynamic
- < memories of millions of virus who are no longer with us today -
- < Thanks GOODNESS!! BEWARE OF THE er..VIRUS
- < \this program is catching program follows after these messeges...
-
- If anyone knows what this is infecting the disks on campus please let
- me know.
-
- Michael K. Blackstock ELTRUT@MSSTATE
-
- P.S. Thanks...................
-
- [Ed. Sure sounds like the Pakistani (aka Brain) virus to me. There
- have been some excellent technical descriptions of the Brain published
- on VIRUS-L. Does someone have one of these handy that they could send
- to Mr. Blackstock (directly)?]
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Wed, 3 May 89 17:00 EST
- From: "Shawn V. Hernan" <VALENTIN@pittvms.BITNET>
- Subject: old question - AV software info request (PC)
-
- Please anyone,
- Where can I get virus detection/removal software from some
- network? I am looking for MS-DOS stuff, I have all the Macintosh stuff
- I need, and I know where to get it. But I run a library of about 500
- MS-DOS packages and I need to check for/eliminate viruses. I am hoping
- to get public domain or shareware stuff. Any help is appreciated. If
- possible, please respond directly to me, as this is rather urgent.
- Thanks....
-
- - ------------
- Shawn V. Hernan
- - --------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Computing and Information Systems (Computer Center), Academic Computing
- University of Pittsburgh valentin%VMS.CIS.PITTSBURGH.EDU@VB.CC.CMU.EDU
- 4015 O'Hara Street valentin@PITTVMS.BITNET
- Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania 15260 valentin@cisunx.UUCP
- (412) 624-9356 valentin@CISVM{1,2,3}.CCnet
- __________________________________________________________________________
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Wed, 3 May 89 17:48:55 EDT
- From: vanembur@gauss.rutgers.edu (Bill Van Emburg)
- Subject: Possible virus, info request (PC)
-
- My friend's PC-compatible seems to have a virus, and I don't have
- enough experience with IBM viruses to recognize it. Does this sound
- familiar to anyone??
-
- This virus (if it really is a virus) modifies the command.com
- file. The result of this the next time you boot the machine
- is that all .exe files are no longer executable. The machine
- boots just fine, and .bat files run, but the autoexec.bat
- file dies when it tries to execute xtree.exe. The .exe files
- are still there, they just can't be run. Diagnostics were
- run on the hard drive, and everything checked out. When the
- command.com file was re-copied from an original DOS 3.3
- disk, everything started working normally again.
-
- The BIG question: Was the virus killed when the command.com was
- re-copied? How can we be sure that it isn't
- residing somewhere else, waiting to try it's little
- game again?
-
- The secondary question: Does anyone recognize this virus? Does anyone
- have any additional info (background, how it
- works, what it does, where it hides, and how
- to detect it) on it?
-
- -Bill Van Emburg
- Rutgers University
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Sun, 30 Apr 89 05:36:50 EDT
- From: Bruce Burrell <USERW6BL@UMICHUM.BITNET>
- Subject: Boot viruses - forwarded from HomeBase (PC)
-
- I was asked by Frank Nalls, a user on HomeBase Virus BBS, to forward
- this message to VIRUS-L. I'll forward responses to him there; if you
- want to send private mail to him through me, that's fine too
- (BPB@um.cc.umich.edu)
-
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- I have just finished reading the Virus-L postings for the past year or
- so and found a lot of good information in them. I'm concerned,
- though, about some of the virus product attitudes that I've seen
- expressed. Jim Goodwin, Mark Shaw and Tim Sankary reported on the
- most common infections from over 700 corporate occurences and and
- found that over 90% of PC infections were caused by one of the
- following viruses:
-
- . Pakistani Brain (Basit and Mjad Original)
- . Pakistani Brain HD Version
- . Alameda (Yale)
- . Alameda (Version - C, Modifies FAT)
- . Australian (Stoned) - Original Version
- . Venezuelan (Den Zuk)
- . Venezuelen-CX (No display)
- . Ping Pong (Italian)
- . Nichols (Original Version)
-
- The reason I bring this up is that all 9 of these viruses are boot
- sector infectors. Virus filter products (like Flu-Shot+ and C-4)
- can't prevent or even detect any boot sector virus. Yet I see these
- products hyped as good virus protection products. Anyone who claims
- these products works either has never seen a boot sector virus or has
- never tested these products against them. The only products that are
- even remotely useful against these viruses are logging products like
- Virus-Pro, Sentry, Magic Bullets and other detection type products.
- I'm not trying to flame Mr. McAfee's C-4 or Mr. Greenberg's Flushot+,
- it's just that the products don't match virus realities. I also have
- to strongly disagree with Mr. David Bader's assessment of Sentry. I
- suggest he try some live viruses and check the differences himself.
-
- Frank Nalls
-
- ------------------------------
-
- End of VIRUS-L Digest
- *********************
-
- Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253
-