RE: mac trojan in-the-wild

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, what OS/email client and
what did they have to do to get it to run). But specifically, how many
were exploits where a user had to visit an untrusted site, download an
executable, run it, and explicitly give it administrative credentials to
run? Not just people running as administrator, but typing in the admin
account credentials to run it as administrator as one has to do on OSX?
My guess (and I'd really like to see details on your findings) is that
most "interactive" issues are the more "trivial" interactive issues
(like clicking a link and launching a vulnerable version of IE).

But more importantly, let's look at things from the other side. Let's
say I'm wrong, and that Gadi is right on target with his "hit hard"
prediction and that we should be very concerned with this. Given the
requirements here, that again being flagrant ignorance where all the
above steps are executed (including the explicit admin part)-- what
exactly are we supposed to do? If people are willing and able to go
through the motions above what can we as security people do to prevent
it? Far too many people in this industry are far too quick to point out
how desperate the situation is at all turns, but I don't see many people
offering real solutions. But you know, I have to say... If we are
really going to consider this "serious," and we are really going to
define part of our jobs as being responsible for stopping people who
have absolutely no concerns for what they do and are willing to enter
their admin credentials into any box that asks for it, then I'd say that
there is a *serious* misunderstanding about what security is, and what
can be done about it-- either that, or I'm just in the wrong business.

t


-----Original Message-----
From: Roger A. Grimes [mailto:roger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 5:37 PM
To: Alex Eckelberry; Thor (Hammer of God); Gadi Evron;
bugtraq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: mac trojan in-the-wild

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 analyze Linux or BSD threats, but my gut feeling puts them at
the same level or even higher.

With 86% or more of the past threats requiring social engineering to
pull off, we can safely say the "future" you state below is here now.

Now, what is interesting is that any exploit requiring social
engineering to work has so far been less of a problem than the vast
majority of "remote buffer overflow" exploits like the Blaster and SQL
worms. Social engineering-required malware still works, and works
well,
but not with the same success of remote buffer overflow malware. There
is very little we in the security space can point to as a
success...but
the overall decrease in remote buffer overflows is one.
Unfortunately,
the social engineering malware is getting better day-by-day. We can no
longer count on mispellings (sic) and bad grammar to be malware
indicators. Our users, regardless of the OS, are ready as ever to
click
on interesting content, malicious or not. We've got to design our
defenses to pay more attention to client-side attacks, but it is the
weak point now, not in the future.

Roger

*****************************************************************
*Roger A. Grimes, InfoWorld, Security Columnist
*CPA, CISSP, CISA, MCSE: Security (2000/2003), CEH, yada...yada...
*email: roger_grimes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx or roger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Author of Windows Vista Security: Securing Vista Against Malicious
Attacks (Wiley)
*http://www.amazon.com/Windows-Vista-Security-Securing-
Malicious/dp/0470
101555
*****************************************************************


-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Eckelberry [mailto:AlexE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 5:49 PM
To: Thor (Hammer of God); Gadi Evron; bugtraq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: mac trojan in-the-wild

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

Relevant Pages

  • Re: [Full-disclosure] mac trojan in-the-wild
    ... through the motions above what can we as security people do to prevent ... I didn't analyze Linux or BSD threats, but my gut feeling puts them at ... With 86% or more of the past threats requiring social engineering to ... but not with the same success of remote buffer overflow malware. ...
    (Full-Disclosure)
  • Re: Windows Security Center damaged
    ... This one runs four different "command-line" scanners, ... In the Security Center, ... I'm sure that some malware caused that ... ETrust Internet Security Suite includes a firewall. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin)
  • Re: Windows Security Center damaged
    ... In the Security Center, ... I'm sure that some malware caused that ... It looks like you recommend having 5 to 6 tools, ... ETrust Internet Security Suite includes a firewall. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin)
  • RE: Sexy pen-testers and auditing...
    ... that it does have to deal with security, maybe some in the compsec industry ... While there are tons of write-ups on social engineering, ... "Men have been taught that it is a virtue to agree with others. ... pen testing experience in our state of the art hacking lab. ...
    (Pen-Test)
  • How To Utterly Destroy The Security By Obscurity Myth
    ... The Financial Times tries spreading some Apple Mac security FUD ... Take the number of known malware in the wild for Mac. ... verifiable data there are 2036x more malware for Windows than Mac. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)