Coming to your inbox -- photo-viruses

Bull

Banned
Sep 22, 2004
421
1
0
Windows users vulnerable to 'poisoned' pictures
Users warned hackers may unleash wave of viruses in photo files
Sarah Staples
CanWest News Service
Sunday, September 26, 2004

Hackers exploiting a newly discovered vulnerability in Microsoft Windows operating systems have found a way to turn innocent vacation snapshots into virus-laden "poisoned" images that can travel undetected through e-mail, infecting computers and laying bare victims' credit cards and personal information.

The threat has computer-security experts warning that the world's first photo-virus attack is inevitable and potentially imminent, after step-by-step instructions for embedding malicious code into image files were posted last week to several websites that monitor the emergence of new computer viruses.

Although there have been past attempts to masquerade viruses as images -- notably, by changing ".exe", call letters denoting a program, to ".jpg" -- and hackers are also known to hide messages inside images as a form of encryption, Microsoft confirmed this is the first time any loophole has been discovered that would allow the image itself to be transformed into a virus.

The first photo-viruses "should be arriving in your in-box this week," predicted Ryan Purita, a hacker expert with the Vancouver consulting firm Totally Connected Security Ltd., who is one of nine certified computer forensic examiners in Canada.

"All I have to be is a 12-year-old who knows a little Visual Basic (programming language)," said Purita. "Believe me, there's people out there with more malicious intentions who will figure out some pretty damaging things to do with this."

Infected images could arrive attached to spam or MSN chat messages, for example. Or, junk e-mail might contain links to websites that automatically download a virus as soon as the user clicks on the link.

Viruses could also be designed to root through family and vacation photos and embed these with malicious code.

Once in control of an infected machine, the hacker can turn it into a "zombie" from which to launch attacks on other computers, or may simply track every keystroke, watching for passwords and anything typed into supposedly "secure" internet banking or shopping sites.

"They could do anything, it's up to their imagination," Purita said. "You think you're on a secure site but it's like they're looking over your shoulder."

The problem is in the "decoder" used by Microsoft operating systems, such as XP, 2000 and NT, to render computerized code as an image. When a .jpg arrives by e-mail, Windows recognizes its "header" -- consisting of the letters "YOYO" -- as a command to display the file as a picture. To create a photo-virus, the hacker simply substitutes the header "YOYO" with malicious instructions.

John Weigelt, chief security advisor for Microsoft Canada, said there is no evidence that any photo-viruses have been released; however, he confirmed hackers began figuring out ways to create them days after Microsoft published a bulletin outlining the problem on Sept. 14.

"What we're seeing is that the malicious user waits until (Microsoft releases a security update), and they do some reverse engineering to see how we fixed a problem and how they can exploit the change," said Weigelt.

Companies and home computer users can protect against infected photos by downloading patches, such as the Service Pack 2 for Windows XP, available from the Web site www.Microsoft.com/security, Weigelt said.

According to Purita, that won't be enough to forestall large-scale attacks because .jpgs have not traditionally been among the questionable entities weeded out since "nobody thought there were any problems with them."
 
Last edited:

Bull

Banned
Sep 22, 2004
421
1
0
Hifisex:

Sure you can download the porn, but the former trustworthy JPG is now suspect.

Not to worry. I'm sure the antivirus programs will quickly ramp up.

It's like sex. Always use protection.
 

Fudd

Banned
Apr 30, 2004
1,037
0
0
Best thing to do is always backup your important data.
 

Maury Beniowski

Blastocyst
Mar 31, 2004
1,869
1
0
In a nice wet pussy!
Coming to your inbox -- photo-viruses (thank you Bill Gates)

Hey Bull? Tell me, why do you hold Bill Gates responsible for Internet problems, caused mainly by others? Do you also blame him for a lack of intelligence?
 

Bull

Banned
Sep 22, 2004
421
1
0
It appears that this newest threat, like most of the other high profile threats, is again exploiting Windows well documented security weaknesses, not the other operating systems. That's what I was referring to.
 
Last edited:

Reggae Gangbang

New member
Sep 18, 2004
17
0
0
Bull said:
It appears that this newest threat, like most of the other high profile threats, is again exploiting Windows well documented security weaknesses, not the other operating systems. That's what I was referring to.
The reason why the threat is high profile is because Windows is overwhelmingly the most widely used OS.

If you are concluding that because windows operating systems security threats are more widely publicized, therefore windows OS is less secure than other OS then you are ill informed.

Here is an excerpt from a article comparing security threats amoung different OS.

For example, Windows security holes generally receive a lot of press because of the software's popularity, but the statistics show that Windows isn't the subject of significantly more advisories than other operating systems. Windows XP Professional saw 46 advisories in 2003-2004, with 48 percent of vulnerabilities allowing remote attacks and 46 percent enabling system access, Secunia said.


Suse Linux Enterprise Server (SLES) 8 had 48 advisories in the same period, with 58 percent of the holes exploitable remotely and 37 percent enabling system access. Red Hat's Advanced Server 3 had 50 advisories in the same period - despite the fact that counting only began in November of last year. Sixty-six percent of the vulnerabilities were remotely exploitable, with 25 granting system access.


Mac OS X doesn't stand out as particularly more secure than the competition, according to Secunia. Of the 36 advisories issued in 2003-2004, 61 percent could be exploited across the Internet and 32 percent enabled attackers to take over the system. The proportion of critical bugs was also comparable with other software: 33 percent of the OS X vulnerabilities were "highly" or "extremely" critical by Secunia's reckoning, compared with 30 percent for XP Professional and 27 percent for SLES 8 and just 12 percent for Advanced Server 3. OS X had the highest proportion of "extremely critical" bugs at 19 percent.


As for the old guard, Sun's Solaris 9 saw its share of problems, with 60 advisories in 2003-2004, 20 percent of which were "highly" or "extremely" critical, Secunia said.


Link
 

cancowboy2001

Member
Jul 27, 2003
433
0
16
WiYd said:
is it limited to jpegs or is it gifs and other formats as well?
I am pretty sure it is only JPEGs.
Mircosoft Security Bulletin MS04-028
There are patches available (info was buried at the end of the original article) - go to Windows Update and get them.
 

Bull

Banned
Sep 22, 2004
421
1
0
Reggae Gangbang said:
The reason why the threat is high profile is because Windows is overwhelmingly the most widely used OS.

If you are concluding that because windows operating systems security threats are more widely publicized, therefore windows OS is less secure than other OS then you are ill informed.
Thanks for the info, RG. I guess I was ill informed. I did have the idea Windows was less secure than the other OSs.

Thanks for taking the time to inform us all. :)
 
Vancouver Escorts