Re: TCP port 5000 syn increasing

• Previous message: Valdis.Kletnieks_at_vt.edu: "Re: TCP port 5000 syn increasing"
• In reply to: Steven Trewick: "RE: TCP port 5000 syn increasing"
• Next in thread: Meidinger Chris: "RE: TCP port 5000 syn increasing"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

To: <incidents@securityfocus.com>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:01:43 -0400

I have noticed the TCP port 5000's also, and I'm getting a fair amount from
the same IP's on 445 TCP. Thinking there may be a connection, I returned the
call on a few of the IP's that are knocking on my door on 5000 and 445,
checking for a few common ports. I saw a lot of TCP ports 21 and 113, port
21 consistently said "220 FTP Server ready". Anonymous login works, and
working directory was always "C:/TEMP", with full read access to C:/. In
that directory is d0r1t1s.exe, so naturally I RETR it. It's an SFX, looks
like a IRC rootkit, built on HackerDefender, I googled for some of the
filenames in the SFX and found

http://www.windowsbbs.com/showthread.php?p=158096#post158096

I'm wondering if it doesn't initially get dropped by

http://www.lurhq.com/bobax.html

or some similar thing.

I assume something new on the IRC-Warez thing. Lets find out more. I list
files and sort by date, to find the running kit, found many variants had
dropped various dirs with arbirtary names in /system32, kits found. I grab a
few. What I found is a multi-functional rootkit, uses many tools to do it's
work, uses X-focus's X-scan, dumps usernames and PW's to HTML files named
from the corresponding IP. It uses a renamed psexec.exe from Winternals, and
common to them also seems to be what looks like an IRC bouncer of which the
various mutations that I have seem to have one thing in common, they all try
to connect to different IP addresses at q8hell.org. I'm out of time right
now, I'll dig deeper into this later if anyone is interested.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven Trewick" <STrewick@joplings.co.uk>
To: "'Frank Knobbe'" <frank@knobbe.us>; "Paul Schmehl" <pauls@utdallas.edu>
Cc: <incidents@securityfocus.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 7:08 AM
Subject: RE: TCP port 5000 syn increasing

>
>
> > That begs the question if it isn't becoming useless nowadays to count
> > port scans.
>
> IMHO it has *never* been sufficient to simply count and analyse probes
> by port. It is simply not possible to identify network traffic in this
> way. A probe on tcp 139 could be a worm, a misconfigured XP box, a
> sKiddie running nmap, frankly it cold be anything.
>
> > Perhaps we should focus instead on catching the worms and provide
payload,
>
> > or payload hashes.
>
> Yes, an excellent idea, if I see unusual tcp probes at my borders, I
> usually at least hook up a quick netcat listener to see if anything
> appears, obviously UDP traffic can be logged straight off the wire.
>
> This is really a minimum of info to collect (and its still an awful
> lot). Counting probes will give you nothing but largely meaningless
> numbers.
>
>
> > Otherwise, how would you pick up the new strain of SQL slammer amongst
> > all the existing SQL port scans?
>
> You wouldn't. Because you simply wouldn't know what you were
> looking at.
>
> The ability to say "12.53 % of unsolicited traffic at my network
> border is directed at tcp port 25" tells you absolutely nothing
> until you know why that traffic is arriving, and what the
> traffic contains.
>
> Port 25 for instance could be spam, could be a sendmail exploit,
> could be a misconfigured mail server somewhere, could be legit
> mail, could be a worm using a sendmail exploit to spread (and
> send spam, blended threat, see ?)
>
>
> $LOCAL_CURRENCY 0.02 '-)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> </code>
> The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be
privileged, it is intended for the addressee only. If you have received this
e-mail in error please delete it from your system. The statements and
opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not
necessarily reflect those of the company. Whilst Joplings Group operates an
e-mail anti-virus program it does not accept responsibility for any damage
whatsoever that is caused by viruses being passed.
> joplings.co.uk
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> Free 30-day trial: firewall with virus/spam protection, URL filtering,
VPN,
> wireless security
>
> Protect your network against hackers, viruses, spam and other risks with
Astaro
> Security Linux, the comprehensive security solution that combines six
> applications in one software solution for ease of use and lower total cost
of
> ownership.
>
> Download your free trial at
> http://www.securityfocus.com/sponsor/Astaro_incidents_040517
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free 30-day trial: firewall with virus/spam protection, URL filtering, VPN,
wireless security
Protect your network against hackers, viruses, spam and other risks with Astaro
Security Linux, the comprehensive security solution that combines six
applications in one software solution for ease of use and lower total cost of
ownership.
Download your free trial at
http://www.securityfocus.com/sponsor/Astaro_incidents_040517
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

• Previous message: Valdis.Kletnieks_at_vt.edu: "Re: TCP port 5000 syn increasing"
• In reply to: Steven Trewick: "RE: TCP port 5000 syn increasing"
• Next in thread: Meidinger Chris: "RE: TCP port 5000 syn increasing"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]