A Computer hardware and components forum. ComputerBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ComputerBanter.com forum » Processors » Overclocking
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the mail box



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 6th 03, 05:28 AM
Phil Weldon
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default 'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the mail box

'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a
valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the
mail box.

I created a new mailbox and used it to post to
microsoft.public.security.virus. Elapsed time to the first 'swen-mail'; 2
hours 2 minutes.

--
Fade Away,


  #2  
Old October 6th 03, 02:02 PM
Wookie
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default 'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the mail box

What Usenet Group was that ??? . Do you think what NG even matters? If they
have some bot that goes out and scans all the NG's I guess it probably
doesn't matter.
I kept getting an EMAIL distribution last week from people I didn't even
know saying that one of you guys is sending me a virus from your address
book. I responded with that I thought this security patch thing was from
NG's ... it kind of looks like it is ... thanks for the experiment.

"Phil Weldon" wrote in message
hlink.net...
'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a
valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the
mail box.

I created a new mailbox and used it to post to
microsoft.public.security.virus. Elapsed time to the first 'swen-mail'; 2
hours 2 minutes.

--
Fade Away,




  #3  
Old October 6th 03, 09:14 PM
Phil Weldon
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default 'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the mail box

The newsgroup was microsoft.public.security.net.
This current post to a.c.h.o is made with a mailbox identity that will be
used only once. I'll check what 'swen-mail' arrives, and post the results
here.

Meanwhile, perhaps the following will help

The 'swen' worm and its effects, particularly on

users with uninfected machines



The flood of e-mail ('swen-mail') is being generated by the 'swen' worm.
Locally, there is not much you can do to stop the flood. Below you will
find a discussion of the effects of the 'swen' worm and ways you can handle
the flood you are getting, even though your machine may not be infected, and
may be well protected.



Only your ISP can stop the flood of 'swen' generated e-mail; by scanning all
e-mail for virus infection.



Until your ISP or e-mail service begins to scan all e-mail for virus
infection, you can use a filter and a program that allows partial
downloading of e-mail messages (Veronica Loell posts information about
these filters quite often; the information is also available at
http://nakawe.sf.net/MMM3.)






Symantec, the publisher of Norton AntiVirus, has a description of the
worm, how to remove it, and removal tools at
. Other
publishers of antivirus programs have similar webpages. Note well, removing
this worm after your system has been infected is not a simple task.





The 'swen' worm can harvest e-mail addresses from newsgroup postings, so it
is very important to disguise your e-mail identity when posting to Usenet
newsgroups (like microsoft.public.security.virus and tens of thousands of
others). You can find out how at

http://www.mailmsg.com/SPAM_munging.htm .

This worm has two main effects, and some secondary effects




I. Main effects

A. It infects vulnerable systems and networks.

B. It generates a FLOOD of infected e-mail that is sent to e-mail
addresses it harvests from infected machine and networks. These infected
e-mails are of two types

1. An HTML message that looks like a legitimate Microsoft Security
Bulletin; the hotlinks in this message are valid Microsoft links, and will
even lead you to a description that will allow you to identify this e-mail
as bogus. The message has an attached 104 KByte file that contains the
worm. If you don't have all appropriate Microsoft security patches and
Service Packs installed, it may be possible for your system to be infected
EVEN IF YOU DON'T OPEN THE MESSAGE. So far, the body of this message is
always the same, though the Subject and From lines differ widely. This
message, so far, can be easily be blocked by detecting the string 'Run
attached file' in the body ( in fact, it would be a good practice to
consider ANY e-mail that contains this string AND has an attachment to very,
very likely to carry an infection.

2. A plain text message that purports to be a notification of an
'Undeliverable e-mail', with an attachment that purports to be a copy of the
undeliverable e-mail. This attached file is 104 KBytes long and contains the
worm. The Subject line, From line, and body present in thousands of
combinations, and probably will continue to mutate. Even worse, real e-mail
addresses harvested from infected systems and networks, and from Usenet
newsgroup posts are tagged onto this type of message, causing one of the
secondary effects.

II. Secondary effects
A. Spam effect
1. Mailboxes with an e-mail address that has been harvested from
infected systems, networks and Usenet newsgroup postings begin to be flood
with infected e-mail.
[Personal example: my machines are not infected, but this worm began to
flood my mailbox 17SEP03. I now receive more than 1500 infected e-mail
messages per day. I must empty my mailbox every 5 minutes, 24/7 to avoid
the possibility of having legitimate e-mail bounced. I had to install an
application just to segregate the cleaned, previously infected e-mail
from legitimate e-mail (standard spam blockers can't do this.) There are
filters and programs that can identify this 'swen-mail' and that require
downloading only a portion of an e-mail message to allow discarding or
keeping it based on whether it is

'swen-mail' or not. However, you still must arrange to do this operation
often enough to keep your mailbox from overflowing past the general 10 MByte
limit and bouncing subsequent e-mail. About 80 'swen-mail' messages take up
10 MBytes of storage. If you get 500 'swen-mail messages per day, that
means checking and clearing your mailbox at least every four hours, 24/7, to
insure that no valid e-mail messages are bounced.
B. Notifications from mail services that DO scan for infected
messages, but unfortunately do not realize that the e-mail addresses given
for the sender are either bogus or e-mail addresses harvested by the worm.
Thus, completely innocent mailboxes have insult added to injury.

****

What can you do locally as an individual (i.e. in a SmallOfficeHomeOffice
environment, and /or as a recreational user)?
#1. You can use a remote virus scan from one of the antivirus program
publishers
THEN
#2. You can remove any infections discovered
THEN
#3. You install a good antivirus program, keep it active, keep the virus
definitions up-to-date (at the moment you should update these definitions
EVERY day), and set to scan all incoming e-mails and downloads.
THEN
#4. You can install all appropriate Microsoft security patches and Service
Packs.
THEN
#5. You can consider additional security (DCHP server, firewall, boric acid
[for roaches], .....

If you begin to be flooded with these infected messages, COMPLAIN to your
ISP; send them this URL
http://xtra.co.nz/products/0,,8969,00.html of an ISP that scans incoming
e-mail before passing it to a mailbox. Ask for an increased mailbox size
(if you are getting 1500 of these infected e-mails per day, you will need a
mailbox size over 150 MBytes just to avoid the necessity of completely
emptying it EVERY DAY. Ask about the implicit duty of the ISP to provide
reliable e-mail service, and if they have received notification of any
pending class actions you might join. Ask if they will unbundle their
services so you can opt out of e-mail service and save that cost. That's
about
all you can do about the e-mail flood; only your ISP or other e-mail
provider can come close to solving this problem.

When the e-mail flood becomes too painful, find an ISP or other e-mail
provider that DOES scan and discard infected e-mail before passing it to
your mailbox, and then change to that ISP and/or e-mail provider. Changing
your e-mail address is no solution; as soon as your new e-mail address is
harvested from an infected system or network, the problem starts again.



In the meantime you can use a filter and a program that allows partial
downloading of e-mail messages (Veronica Loell posts information about
these filters quite often; the information is also available at
http://nakawe.sf.net/MMM3 .)

When a mailserver is scanning and not just deleting infected e-mail, but is
also sending an e-mail to notify the sender, write the administrator a nasty
note asking them to stop sending these notices.

****
That's about it; you can proof your system against infection, but only
changes at the mailserver level can stop reception of a flood of infected
e-mails and increasing numbers of inappropriate notices that you've sent
infected e-mail from arriving in your mailbox.

Phil Weldon


--
Phil Weldon, pweldonatmindjumpdotcom
For communication,
replace "at" with the 'at sign'
replace "mindjump" with "mindspring."
replace "dot" with "."
replace "dot" with a "."
replace mindjump with mindspring
"Wookie" wrote in message
news[email protected]
What Usenet Group was that ??? . Do you think what NG even matters? If

they
have some bot that goes out and scans all the NG's I guess it probably
doesn't matter.
I kept getting an EMAIL distribution last week from people I didn't even
know saying that one of you guys is sending me a virus from your address
book. I responded with that I thought this security patch thing was from
NG's ... it kind of looks like it is ... thanks for the experiment.

"Phil Weldon" wrote in message
hlink.net...
'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a
valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the
mail box.

I created a new mailbox and used it to post to
microsoft.public.security.virus. Elapsed time to the first 'swen-mail';

2
hours 2 minutes.

--
Fade Away,








  #4  
Old October 6th 03, 10:02 PM
Phil Weldon
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default 'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the mail box

Well, the results are in.

The only use of the exclusively_forpostingto_acho(at)mindspring.com
was one post to this newsgroup at 4:14 PM EDT 06OCT03.

The first 'swen-mail' arrived at that mailbox 4:31 PM EDT 06OCT03.

Elapsed time, 17 minutes. The clear winner - alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
beats microsoft.public.security.virus by 1 hour 15 minutes, spreading the
'swen' worm 700% as fast. What an overclock!
--
Phil Weldon
pweldonatmindjumpdotcom
For communication,
replace "at" with the 'at sign'
replace "mindjump" with "mindspring."
replace "dot" with "."
replace "dot" with a "."
replace mindjump with mindspring
"Phil Weldon" wrote in
message k.net...
The newsgroup was microsoft.public.security.net.
This current post to a.c.h.o is made with a mailbox identity that will be
used only once. I'll check what 'swen-mail' arrives, and post the results
here.

Meanwhile, perhaps the following will help

The 'swen' worm and its effects, particularly on

users with uninfected machines



The flood of e-mail ('swen-mail') is being generated by the 'swen' worm.
Locally, there is not much you can do to stop the flood. Below you will
find a discussion of the effects of the 'swen' worm and ways you can

handle
the flood you are getting, even though your machine may not be infected,

and
may be well protected.



Only your ISP can stop the flood of 'swen' generated e-mail; by scanning

all
e-mail for virus infection.



Until your ISP or e-mail service begins to scan all e-mail for virus
infection, you can use a filter and a program that allows partial
downloading of e-mail messages (Veronica Loell posts information about
these filters quite often; the information is also available at
http://nakawe.sf.net/MMM3.)






Symantec, the publisher of Norton AntiVirus, has a description of the
worm, how to remove it, and removal tools at
. Other
publishers of antivirus programs have similar webpages. Note well,

removing
this worm after your system has been infected is not a simple task.





The 'swen' worm can harvest e-mail addresses from newsgroup postings, so

it
is very important to disguise your e-mail identity when posting to Usenet
newsgroups (like microsoft.public.security.virus and tens of thousands of
others). You can find out how at

http://www.mailmsg.com/SPAM_munging.htm .

This worm has two main effects, and some secondary effects




I. Main effects

A. It infects vulnerable systems and networks.

B. It generates a FLOOD of infected e-mail that is sent to e-mail
addresses it harvests from infected machine and networks. These infected
e-mails are of two types

1. An HTML message that looks like a legitimate Microsoft

Security
Bulletin; the hotlinks in this message are valid Microsoft links, and will
even lead you to a description that will allow you to identify this e-mail
as bogus. The message has an attached 104 KByte file that contains the
worm. If you don't have all appropriate Microsoft security patches and
Service Packs installed, it may be possible for your system to be infected
EVEN IF YOU DON'T OPEN THE MESSAGE. So far, the body of this message is
always the same, though the Subject and From lines differ widely. This
message, so far, can be easily be blocked by detecting the string 'Run
attached file' in the body ( in fact, it would be a good practice to
consider ANY e-mail that contains this string AND has an attachment to

very,
very likely to carry an infection.

2. A plain text message that purports to be a notification of

an
'Undeliverable e-mail', with an attachment that purports to be a copy of

the
undeliverable e-mail. This attached file is 104 KBytes long and contains

the
worm. The Subject line, From line, and body present in thousands of
combinations, and probably will continue to mutate. Even worse, real

e-mail
addresses harvested from infected systems and networks, and from Usenet
newsgroup posts are tagged onto this type of message, causing one of the
secondary effects.

II. Secondary effects
A. Spam effect
1. Mailboxes with an e-mail address that has been harvested

from
infected systems, networks and Usenet newsgroup postings begin to be flood
with infected e-mail.
[Personal example: my machines are not infected, but this worm began to
flood my mailbox 17SEP03. I now receive more than 1500 infected e-mail
messages per day. I must empty my mailbox every 5 minutes, 24/7 to avoid
the possibility of having legitimate e-mail bounced. I had to install an
application just to segregate the cleaned, previously infected e-mail
from legitimate e-mail (standard spam blockers can't do this.) There are
filters and programs that can identify this 'swen-mail' and that require
downloading only a portion of an e-mail message to allow discarding or
keeping it based on whether it is

'swen-mail' or not. However, you still must arrange to do this operation
often enough to keep your mailbox from overflowing past the general 10

MByte
limit and bouncing subsequent e-mail. About 80 'swen-mail' messages take

up
10 MBytes of storage. If you get 500 'swen-mail messages per day, that
means checking and clearing your mailbox at least every four hours, 24/7,

to
insure that no valid e-mail messages are bounced.
B. Notifications from mail services that DO scan for infected
messages, but unfortunately do not realize that the e-mail addresses given
for the sender are either bogus or e-mail addresses harvested by the worm.
Thus, completely innocent mailboxes have insult added to injury.

****

What can you do locally as an individual (i.e. in a SmallOfficeHomeOffice
environment, and /or as a recreational user)?
#1. You can use a remote virus scan from one of the antivirus program
publishers
THEN
#2. You can remove any infections discovered
THEN
#3. You install a good antivirus program, keep it active, keep the virus
definitions up-to-date (at the moment you should update these definitions
EVERY day), and set to scan all incoming e-mails and downloads.
THEN
#4. You can install all appropriate Microsoft security patches and

Service
Packs.
THEN
#5. You can consider additional security (DCHP server, firewall, boric

acid
[for roaches], .....

If you begin to be flooded with these infected messages, COMPLAIN to your
ISP; send them this URL
http://xtra.co.nz/products/0,,8969,00.html of an ISP that scans incoming
e-mail before passing it to a mailbox. Ask for an increased mailbox size
(if you are getting 1500 of these infected e-mails per day, you will need

a
mailbox size over 150 MBytes just to avoid the necessity of completely
emptying it EVERY DAY. Ask about the implicit duty of the ISP to provide
reliable e-mail service, and if they have received notification of any
pending class actions you might join. Ask if they will unbundle their
services so you can opt out of e-mail service and save that cost. That's
about
all you can do about the e-mail flood; only your ISP or other e-mail
provider can come close to solving this problem.

When the e-mail flood becomes too painful, find an ISP or other e-mail
provider that DOES scan and discard infected e-mail before passing it to
your mailbox, and then change to that ISP and/or e-mail provider.

Changing
your e-mail address is no solution; as soon as your new e-mail address is
harvested from an infected system or network, the problem starts again.



In the meantime you can use a filter and a program that allows partial
downloading of e-mail messages (Veronica Loell posts information about
these filters quite often; the information is also available at
http://nakawe.sf.net/MMM3 .)

When a mailserver is scanning and not just deleting infected e-mail, but

is
also sending an e-mail to notify the sender, write the administrator a

nasty
note asking them to stop sending these notices.

****
That's about it; you can proof your system against infection, but only
changes at the mailserver level can stop reception of a flood of infected
e-mails and increasing numbers of inappropriate notices that you've sent
infected e-mail from arriving in your mailbox.

Phil Weldon


--
Phil Weldon, pweldonatmindjumpdotcom
For communication,
replace "at" with the 'at sign'
replace "mindjump" with "mindspring."
replace "dot" with "."
replace "dot" with a "."
replace mindjump with mindspring
"Wookie" wrote in message
news[email protected]
What Usenet Group was that ??? . Do you think what NG even matters? If

they
have some bot that goes out and scans all the NG's I guess it probably
doesn't matter.
I kept getting an EMAIL distribution last week from people I didn't

even
know saying that one of you guys is sending me a virus from your address
book. I responded with that I thought this security patch thing was

from
NG's ... it kind of looks like it is ... thanks for the experiment.

"Phil Weldon" wrote in message
hlink.net...
'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with

a
valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in

the
mail box.

I created a new mailbox and used it to post to
microsoft.public.security.virus. Elapsed time to the first

'swen-mail';
2
hours 2 minutes.

--
Fade Away,










  #5  
Old October 7th 03, 03:26 AM
Triffid
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default 'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup postwith a valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected messagein the mail box



Phil Weldon wrote:

'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a
valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the
mail box.

I created a new mailbox and used it to post to
microsoft.public.security.virus. Elapsed time to the first 'swen-mail'; 2
hours 2 minutes.


Which effectively means it took a whole 2 hours before someone using an
infected machine read your post.

I'm *really* glad I have access to server-side filters and can dump this
crud before it clogs my mailbox - the flood has slowed somewhat, but the
filters are still deleting a couple of hundred swens daily.

  #6  
Old October 7th 03, 03:49 AM
Phil Weldon
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default 'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the mail box

Not exactly; I believe the 'swen' worm get the e-mail addresses directly
from the newsgroup postings. I open another new mailbox, posted ONCE to
alt.comp.hardware.overclocking, and then killed that newsreader account, but
kept the mailbox. It took 17 minutes for the first 'swen-mail' to arrive at
that mailbox.

--
Phil Weldon, pweldonatmindjumpdotcom

For communication,
replace "at" with the 'at sign'
replace "mindjump" with "mindspring."
replace "dot" with "."

"Triffid" wrote in message
...


Phil Weldon wrote:

'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a
valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the
mail box.

I created a new mailbox and used it to post to
microsoft.public.security.virus. Elapsed time to the first 'swen-mail';

2
hours 2 minutes.


Which effectively means it took a whole 2 hours before someone using an
infected machine read your post.

I'm *really* glad I have access to server-side filters and can dump this
crud before it clogs my mailbox - the flood has slowed somewhat, but the
filters are still deleting a couple of hundred swens daily.



  #7  
Old October 7th 03, 03:59 AM
Strontium
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default 'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the mail box

It gets them from the *.dbx files.

-
Phil Weldon stood up at show-n-tell, in
, and said:

Not exactly; I believe the 'swen' worm get the e-mail addresses
directly from the newsgroup postings. I open another new mailbox,
posted ONCE to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking, and then killed that
newsreader account, but kept the mailbox. It took 17 minutes for the
first 'swen-mail' to arrive at that mailbox.


"Triffid" wrote in message
...


Phil Weldon wrote:

'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post
with a valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected
message in the mail box.

I created a new mailbox and used it to post to
microsoft.public.security.virus. Elapsed time to the first
'swen-mail'; 2 hours 2 minutes.


Which effectively means it took a whole 2 hours before someone using
an infected machine read your post.

I'm *really* glad I have access to server-side filters and can dump
this crud before it clogs my mailbox - the flood has slowed
somewhat, but the filters are still deleting a couple of hundred
swens daily.


--
Strontium

"If you get tired, of satellite flyers. And, fame, has let you down.
Under the wire. And, over the Moon, I'm around... When you gonna grow
up?" - Angie Aparo


  #8  
Old October 7th 03, 04:53 AM
Triffid
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default 'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup postwith a valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected messagein the mail box

Not exactly; I believe the 'swen' worm get the e-mail addresses directly
from the newsgroup postings.


How do you suppose it does that? There is no evidence of the worm
connecting to news servers and reading headers. It doesn't, it waits for
the infected user to run his newsreader, scoops addresses from the
headers (via files created by the newsreader), and adds them to it's
list of targets.

I open another new mailbox, posted ONCE to
alt.comp.hardware.overclocking, and then killed that newsreader account, but
kept the mailbox. It took 17 minutes for the first 'swen-mail' to arrive at
that mailbox.


Exactly. 17 minutes until an infected user read your post.

-- Phil Weldon, pweldonatmindjumpdotcom For communication, replace "at" with the 'at sign' replace "mindjump" with "mindspring." replace "dot" with "." "Triffid" wrote in message ...



Phil Weldon wrote:


'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a
valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the
mail box.

I created a new mailbox and used it to post to
microsoft.public.security.virus. Elapsed time to the first 'swen-mail';


2

hours 2 minutes.



Which effectively means it took a whole 2 hours before someone using an
infected machine read your post.

I'm *really* glad I have access to server-side filters and can dump this
crud before it clogs my mailbox - the flood has slowed somewhat, but the
filters are still deleting a couple of hundred swens daily.





  #9  
Old October 7th 03, 05:00 AM
Phil Weldon
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default 'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the mail box

AND
"The worm also can search for e-mail addresses in various newsgroups. It
connects to NNTP servers listed in the SWEN1.DAT file, gets a list of all
newsgroups on that server and searches recent messages in these newsgroups
for 'nfrom:' and 'nreply-to:' tags. When such tags are found, the worm gets
e-mail addressed after them and writes them to the GERMS0.DBV file. This way
the worm can harvest a lot of e-mail addresses to send itself to." (From
FSecure at http://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/swen.shtml .)


--
Phil Weldon, pweldonatmindjumpdotcom
For communication,
replace "at" with the 'at sign'
replace "mindjump" with "mindspring."
replace "dot" with "."

"Strontium" wrote in message
...
It gets them from the *.dbx files.

-
Phil Weldon stood up at show-n-tell, in
, and said:

Not exactly; I believe the 'swen' worm get the e-mail addresses
directly from the newsgroup postings. I open another new mailbox,
posted ONCE to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking, and then killed that
newsreader account, but kept the mailbox. It took 17 minutes for the
first 'swen-mail' to arrive at that mailbox.


"Triffid" wrote in message
...


Phil Weldon wrote:

'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post
with a valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected
message in the mail box.

I created a new mailbox and used it to post to
microsoft.public.security.virus. Elapsed time to the first
'swen-mail'; 2 hours 2 minutes.

Which effectively means it took a whole 2 hours before someone using
an infected machine read your post.

I'm *really* glad I have access to server-side filters and can dump
this crud before it clogs my mailbox - the flood has slowed
somewhat, but the filters are still deleting a couple of hundred
swens daily.


--
Strontium

"If you get tired, of satellite flyers. And, fame, has let you down.
Under the wire. And, over the Moon, I'm around... When you gonna grow
up?" - Angie Aparo




  #10  
Old October 7th 03, 05:20 AM
Strontium
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default 'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post with a valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected message in the mail box

Right. That's the 'from' and 'to' lines. Not the body of the message. It
also gets email addresses from the body, using the .dbx files. I feel for
all those, out there, that are naive enough to even post to usenet with a
real address. I learned my lesson, 5yrs ago, after getting 5-10 spams a day
after just one post with my real email address. Switched ISP's and stopped
using real address. I don't get spam.


-
Phil Weldon stood up at show-n-tell, in
t, and said:

AND
"The worm also can search for e-mail addresses in various newsgroups.
It connects to NNTP servers listed in the SWEN1.DAT file, gets a list
of all newsgroups on that server and searches recent messages in
these newsgroups for 'nfrom:' and 'nreply-to:' tags. When such tags
are found, the worm gets e-mail addressed after them and writes them
to the GERMS0.DBV file. This way the worm can harvest a lot of e-mail
addresses to send itself to." (From FSecure at
http://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/swen.shtml .)



"Strontium" wrote in message
...
It gets them from the *.dbx files.

-
Phil Weldon stood up at show-n-tell, in
, and said:

Not exactly; I believe the 'swen' worm get the e-mail addresses
directly from the newsgroup postings. I open another new mailbox,
posted ONCE to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking, and then killed that
newsreader account, but kept the mailbox. It took 17 minutes for
the first 'swen-mail' to arrive at that mailbox.


"Triffid" wrote in message
...


Phil Weldon wrote:

'Swen-mail' and the elapsed time between a Usenet newsgroup post
with a valid e-mail addres and the arrival of the first infected
message in the mail box.

I created a new mailbox and used it to post to
microsoft.public.security.virus. Elapsed time to the first
'swen-mail'; 2 hours 2 minutes.

Which effectively means it took a whole 2 hours before someone
using an infected machine read your post.

I'm *really* glad I have access to server-side filters and can dump
this crud before it clogs my mailbox - the flood has slowed
somewhat, but the filters are still deleting a couple of hundred
swens daily.


--
Strontium

"If you get tired, of satellite flyers. And, fame, has let you down.
Under the wire. And, over the Moon, I'm around... When you gonna
grow up?" - Angie Aparo


--
Strontium

"If you get tired, of satellite flyers. And, fame, has let you down.
Under the wire. And, over the Moon, I'm around... When you gonna grow
up?" - Angie Aparo


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 ComputerBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.