North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: Does the Worm have another Payload besides 1434 Floods?
- From: Jack Bates
- Date: Sat Jan 25 19:22:04 2003
From: "Stewart, William C (Bill), SALES"
> But is it carrying anything else that will do more damage,
> or anything that leaves it a security hole to be exploited later?
> It would be really annoying if machines that aren't cleaned up
> later reformat themselves or hang out waiting for further instructions.
All disassembly analasis made shows that it is a simplistic worm designed to
break in, execute, and start sending itself out. No system damage or host
embedding has been detected. The writer of the worm had no intentions of
causing permanent damage.
> Also, several people have commented that restarting their
> MS-SQL servers stops the problem. Does it just stop the flooding,
> but leave code there, or does the worm strictly live in
> transitory data space that's really gone after a restart.
It's really gone after a restart.
> Several people have talked about bursts of ICMP or 6667 traffic,
> and those are probably unrelated, but maybe not.
> (What? More than one cracker on the net or more than one
> program that chokes when overloaded? Who'd'a' thunk it!)
Paranoia. Engineers ignore a lot of things until something critical hits.
Then they go overboard analyzing every little packet that doesn't seem
right. In general, as most EUs are finding out as they install them pesky
firewalls, the 'net is full of "noise".