×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Open Source Malware Search Engine

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 7 years ago | from the in-case-your-computer-isn't-infected-already dept.

123

chr0.ot writes "Metasploit creator HD Moore has released an open-source search engine that finds live malware samples through Google queries. From the article: 'The new Malware Search project provides a Web interface that allows anyone to enter the name of a known virus or Trojan and find Google results for Web sites hosting malicious executables.' The tool then searches for actual malware signatures and uses the signature output from ClamAV to find the name of the malware. This is then used in conjunction with a PE signature matching method to form a Google query. Afterwards the malware can then be downloaded directly from Google."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

123 comments

So.. (5, Funny)

michaelhood (667393) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735441)

Let me get this straight.. now Google is good for porn AND viruses?

How do the other engines stay in business?!?

Re:So.. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15736079)

..now Google is good for porn AND viruses?

So, basically, the Internet is exactly like real sex now, only easier to get.

Finding malware with search engine? (5, Insightful)

broothal (186066) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735447)

I wonder how they got that idea [slashdot.org]. I've never heard of it before [slashdot.org].

Re:Finding malware with search engine? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735520)

Netsense search isn't open source, as is pointed out in the article.

Also, this program supposedly highlights how relatively little malware Google actually indexes, contrary to the two earlier articles you cite. Thus this is an additional development, not a dupe.

Re:Finding malware with search engine? (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 7 years ago | (#15737374)

Then shouldn't those other articles be linked as related articles?

Re:Finding malware with search engine? (3, Informative)

kkuehl (980075) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735606)

HD acknowledges that is where he got the idea. The point of his release is that it is opensource and available to anyone, unlike the websense version.

Re:Finding malware with search engine? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15736140)

I wonder if there's any way to use Google to find dup... triplicates.

Microsoft Version! (3, Funny)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735448)

Clippy:
It looks like your searching for viruses,
well your in the right place.

ps, anyone else notice that slashdot is like waiting for a bus, you wait for hours with no updates then 4 come along all at once.
Hope the problems have been fixed now.

About the bus metaphor (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735460)

you wait for hours with no updates then 4 come along all at once

Only if you mean the same one comes along four times.

Re:Microsoft Version! (1)

walruz (851125) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735523)

ps, anyone else notice that slashdot is like waiting for a bus, you wait for hours with no updates then 4 come along all at once. You must be new around here!

Re:Microsoft Version! (1, Funny)

mingot (665080) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735654)

Even a dumb ass like clippy knows the difference between "your" and "you're".

Since we're off on a tangent anyway (0, Troll)

diersing (679767) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735703)

As a casual observer I've always wanted to ask... Do you feel better now? Do you feel empowered? Intelligent? Superior?

Sure, the poster made a grammatical error, but his thought/idea was communicated right? It's not like you read it and became so confused you couldn't understand his post. So I would really like to ask... What motivated you to point it out and offer nothing to the topic or discussion at hand?

Re:Since we're off on a tangent anyway (1, Insightful)

rufty_tufty (888596) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735778)

As a silent grammar nazi myself I found it difficult to read the origonal post - my brain associates your and you're with different concepts.
I've got in the habit now when reading slashdot of if I can't understand a post, reading it as if i was speaking it (but silently of course).

I just can't read as fast when I have to do that.

Re:Since we're off on a tangent anyway (4, Funny)

Filip22012005 (852281) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735838)

I've got in the habit now when reading slashdot of if I can't understand a post, reading it as if i was speaking it (but silently of course).

I'm trying to read this sentence as if you were speaking it. And you sound sort of silly.

Re:Since we're off on a tangent anyway (2, Funny)

rowama (907743) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735890)

I've got in the habit now when reading slashdot of if I can't understand a post, reading it as if i was speaking it.

Didja read or speak this before posting? Improper verb usage, mangled propositional phrase, missing punctuation.

FTR, I'm not a grammar nazi, but you, by claiming such, opened you'reself up for a little good-natured criticism.

Regards.

Re:Since we're off on a tangent anyway (1)

rufty_tufty (888596) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735923)

Good Point!
That's the reason I'm a silent Grammar Nazi - my particular dialect means I mess up many othe things - I'm just saying that some incorrect grammar usage make me cringe.
I always welcome advice on how I could improve my communication provided people tell me why I've gone wrong, rather than just saying I am wrong.

Re:Since we're off on a tangent anyway (2, Funny)

rowama (907743) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736014)

Your being too kind.

Since I don't normally like to engage in the karma-damaging activity of trolling, I was hoping to get some bang-for-the-buck out of my post. Thus, I left two juicy pieces of bait (i.e., grammatical errors) in my post, and promptly started meta-moderating my heart out to counter the impending down-mod.

BTW, "my particular dialect" must mean english is an auxiliary language for you. Kudos on that and never apologize for the occasional mess-up. I am not among those who are multilingual, so I envy you.

Regards.

Re:Since we're off on a tangent anyway (2, Funny)

mooingyak (720677) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736154)

Your being too kind.

Usually it's not worth the effort, but given this thread I just had too...

That should be:

You're being too kind.

Re:Since we're off on a tangent anyway (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15736470)

Usually it's not worth the effort, but given this thread I just had too...

"had to"

Re:Since we're off on a tangent anyway (1)

thc69 (98798) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736504)

I just had too...
You just had what?

Re:Since we're off on a tangent anyway (1)

mooingyak (720677) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736955)

I clicked submit, and then spotted that right away. I wish I could claim I did it on purpose, but I guess it's just that rule about grammar/spelling corrections having a goof of their own.

But pretending I'm all knowing and stuff and that I make no mistakes:

Just replace the ellipsis with "much beer"

Re:Since we're off on a tangent anyway (1)

rowama (907743) | more than 7 years ago | (#15737268)

Hehe. Thx for the bite. Yes Virginia, persistence does pay;-)

Re:Since we're off on a tangent anyway (1)

mingot (665080) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736768)

The your/you're thing is a pet peeve of mine. The extra vitrol was just revenge for the poster subjecting me to yet another "OMPG CLIPPLY LOLLZORS M$ SUCKS" post.

SO, how did your reply to me make YOU feel?

Re:Microsoft Version! (1)

avirrey (972127) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736197)

Hit the refresh button. Comes with every browser on all OS's, and it won't download malware automatically.

First it was a dupe... (1, Funny)

BumpyCarrot (775949) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735470)

Now it's a tripe.

Re:First it was a dupe... (0, Offtopic)

Tx (96709) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735492)

Aha, I was wondering what the proper word for a dupe-de-dupe was!

Re:First it was a dupe... (0, Offtopic)

Sepper (524857) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735967)

For thoses who aren't native english speakers (I am not, btw)
since:
2 == Duplicate [answers.com] (Dupe!)
3 == triplicate [answers.com] (Tripe)
4 == Quadraplicate [answers.com] (Quad!)
X == Make-up-your-own-plicate (Enough Already!)

Re:First it was a dupe... (0, Offtopic)

gatzke (2977) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736212)

At one point we were calling these "trupes" instead, following along the "dupe" lines.

Tripe is especially funny, as it is a real word and fitting at that. Frrom Dictionary.com.

tripe
      1. The rubbery lining of the stomach of cattle or other ruminants, used as food.
      2. Informal. Something of no value; rubbish.

Re:First it was a dupe... (0, Offtopic)

gatzke (2977) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736734)


And I get modded offtopic? The freaking story was posted three times, I think that is relevant.

Is there more original ontopic stuff to say about a story we have seen THREE TIMES?

Re:First it was a dupe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735702)

quick! feed it to your little dog!

Re:First it was a dupe... (-1, Troll)

soliptic (665417) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735787)

Yeah. Dupes I can sorta forgive (not that there's any reason for them, the editors get paid, right, and searching your own site can't exactly be fucking difficult -- but I will let them slide under the "all part of the charm of slashdot" theory). But this is just an absolute fucking joke. Fix up, ScuttleMonkey.

Re:First it was a dupe... (3, Informative)

Ash Vince (602485) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736051)

Actually, no it isnt. Although morons who dont read the full article might thinks it was.

The previous stories

(http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/15/12 53240 and http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/11/131 220 [slashdot.org])

were referring to another security research co who did something similar and then refused to share it.
This story is about someone not liking that they wont share, going a little bit further than they did and then putting it on a website and enabling it to the full.

I looked at the previous (Websense) story on friday or whenever but found it a little annoying that there was nothing to back up the article. This time someone has actually posted a working link to a project and source code.

What it doesn't say in the FA... (0, Troll)

Karem Lore (649920) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735479)

What it doesn't say is that once you put a request in, your IP is logged, looked up, your ISP contacted, address, phone number, work place and pets names retrieved and the whole lot is sent for cross refrence to a number of intelligence agencies to determine your employer, who is contacted and informed to sack you because you are looking for viruses in the wild...While looking for new jobs, you are traced and if you attempt to get another IT job the agencies will send 100 armed officers to arrest you, charge you with terrorism and send you to guantanamo bay where you will be subjected to torture and only an appointed military lawyer. While there you will admit (whatever your views) that you are anti-american and fighting a non-existant jihad war whereby you will be incarcerated for life...


The link is here [metasploit.com] for those that missed it...

Whats the ROI model here? (1)

cdtoad (14065) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735480)

What other VC are looking at this one? This could be bigger than MySpace! We'll all be rich, if the bubble doesn't pop again.

I wish google would incorporate this into searches (5, Interesting)

transporter_ii (986545) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735497)

I in no way think that google should block sites, but it would be nice if they would scan sites witht this -- especially for sites that install stuff through holes in IE -- and put a little icon on search results that return an infected site. That way you could at least have a heads up before you clicked on a search result about what you were getting into. It would also be great for Firefox, when everyone gets to see how many sites are exploiting IE.

Transporter_ii

MOD PARENT UP (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735517)

are you reading this, google ?

Re:I wish google would incorporate this into searc (3, Informative)

lifgrd1979 (219103) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735613)

Sorry Google can't do it, McAfee already bought that startup - http://www.siteadvisor.com/ [siteadvisor.com].

Re:I wish google would incorporate this into searc (1)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735968)

http://www.siteadvisor.com/
Holy crap. They list most of the worst offenders as "green" -- even crap like valueclick.com or lop.com.
I see that they fit into McAfee's quality pretty well.

Re:I wish google would incorporate this into searc (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736119)

Holy crap. They list most of the worst offenders as "green"

McAfee's automated scans can't and won't red-flag a corporate home page simply because the company is on your personal black list. You might, however, take the time to post a comment.

Re:I wish google would incorporate this into searc (1)

BlindRobin (768267) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735679)

Just thought you might like to know that this is broken at the moment.

McAfee SiteAdvisor (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736013)

put a little icon on search results that return an infected site. That way you could at least have a heads up before you clicked on a search result about what you were getting into. It would also be great for Firefox, when everyone gets to see how many sites are exploiting IE.

Sounds rather like McAfee SiteAdvisor [siteadvisor.com] for IE and Firefox.

SiteAdvisor tests e-mail, downloads, and links. Give an e-mail address to Slashdot and you can expect 6.9 e-mails per week. Reports are detailed and comments can be posted.

The scam artist's best weapons are always psychological. The defenses woven into Firefox are to him never more than a minor inconvenience.

Move Quickly! (1)

jefu (53450) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736077)

Good idea. Now you should Move Quickly and patent the idea.

(Unless McAfee has already done so since another poster notes they do something similar.)

Re:I wish google would incorporate this into searc (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15736389)

You're right, google shouldn't block the sites. Instead browsers like Firefox can use that information to increase security settings (disable scripting, etc.) when visiting a site that has been labeled as containing malware. This could be implemented as a plugin for Firefox.

So I am going to write a virus (2, Funny)

The Ape With No Name (213531) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735516)

that snags a random payload off this site! Thanks Metasploit!

BTW, Dupe, Dupity Dupe, Dupe.

Re:So I am going to write a virus (3, Informative)

mysticgoat (582871) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735965)

How can an article whose content says the earlier article was bogus be a dupe of the earlier article?

How can the initial announcement of a freely available tool be a dupe of the announcement of something that is not for public release?

Conclusion: there are a lot idjits on slashdot who have learned to waggle their fingers on the keyboard and therefore think they are clever. Oh so clever.

Slashdot has become the proving ground for kids who wanna grow up to be one of the million monkeys...

Re:So I am going to write a virus (1)

slowbad (714725) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736911)

proving ground for kids who wanna grow up to be one of the million monkeys

This latest parlor trick will allow kids who can't write viruses to at least be able to collect them. Their very own petting zoo -- complete with some of the exotics -- and some new friends to play with!

Re:So I am going to write a virus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15737260)

But, but... "The Ape With No Name" has a lower UID than you and is, by all rules, more correct.

Right? :)

Ducking Fupes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735524)

Perhaps it should be mandatory for the editors to at least skim the blurbs of every story that is posted. Hell I do that and it only takes me a good 5 minutes a day.

Editors, do you realise there is an option in your preferences that will make it so every section is displayed on the Main page. Do that, and then take five minutes each day to skim through them. Then when you get a story submission that you recognize as having been already posted you can save the five minutes it would take to post it.

Naw, there's ALREADY a Digg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735850)

the dupes are part of what makes Slashdot, well, Slashdotty.

Re:Ducking Fupes (1)

e4g4 (533831) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736267)

An offtopic reply to an offtopic post:

Personally, I'm rather tired of reading comment after comment pointing out that a given article is a dupe - I think the tagging system is sufficient to identify dupitude (hey, you're allowed to make up words in english). If the article's a dupe, don't read it, and by all means, don't comment - just ignore it like the articles that don't interest you.

Re:Ducking Fupes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15736307)

But if I ignored the articles that didn't interest me, I wouldn't contribute at all!

Malware Search Engine? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735549)

Lincoln was shot at Ford's Theater. John F. Kennedy was shot in a Ford Lincoln. Gerald Ford was shot at, but they missed.

It should be noted that week before their respected shootings, President Lincoln was in Monroe, Maryland while President Kennedy was in Marylin Monroe.

Jonny went in to the bakers & asked for a loaf of bread.
Baker; "White or brown"
Jonny; "It doesn't matter, I'm on my bike."

Two nuns in a bath. One says "Pass the soap", and the other says "What am I, a radio?"

Man goes up to other man and says "Give me a bite of your apple". First man says "It's not a pear, it's a banana."

If I'm canoeing up a tree, how many cupcakes does it take to get to the moon? None, since vests don't have sleeves.

Two polar bears are sitting on an iceberg. One falls in the water, the other turns to him and says "bye bye radio!"

A man walks into a bar with a tortoise on his head. He asks for some cheese. The bartender says "but this is a bar", so the man says "that's OK, the tortoise is paying".

"A cat and a fox are taking a bath, and the cat says to the dog "pass the soap," the dog replies "what do I look like, a radio?"
Followed by: " a penguin walks to the top of an iceberg and says "RADDIIOOOO"

Other application (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735607)

How about using search engine techniques to find slashdot dupes?

Thank God! (3, Funny)

skinnygmg (964698) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735627)

I just bought a new PC, and i have no viruses yet.

Re:Thank God! (5, Insightful)

Ash-Fox (726320) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735641)

I just bought a new PC, and i have no viruses yet.
How do you know?

Re:Thank God! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735779)

He's right. I just opened a shell on his machine, and ran a virus scanner. He's clean.

Re:Thank God! (1)

jimwelch (309748) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735977)

Because he never connected it to the internet.
or
Because he never turned it on yet.
or
Because it runs Linux xyz/xyz BSD/...

Re:Thank God! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735990)

your sig has a spelling mistake in it

Re:Thank God! (3, Informative)

pNutz (45478) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736031)

I just bought a new PC, and i have no viruses yet.

How do you know?

How could [arstechnica.com] he know?

I wonder... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735636)

what MS has to say about this.
This is outright competition for their closed source malware search engine IE.

I use Windows (5, Funny)

Cro Magnon (467622) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735648)

I don't need a search engine to find malware.

Re:I use Windows (3, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735878)

That's right, Windows provides this service to you, free of extra charge, it's bundled into the system and can't be removed easily, despite some claims by other malware writers who claim they can't make business because of that!

Just click start - search...

3 dupes in 2 weeks? (0, Offtopic)

Chineseyes (691744) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735705)

wow 3 dupes of the same story in a 2 week span whats the record for dupes of the same story here?

and coming soon... (1)

trianglecat (318478) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735706)

- the bag of snakes locator
- the shard of glass necktie finder
- the kick in the crotch searcher

Seriously, if this were part of your search results as a heads up of what to avoid I can see it being quite valuable. But, short of research or bad intentions... why do i want to find live malware?

Re:and coming soon... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735929)

I don't know. Based on the rest of your list, how about a service for people with weird fetishes?

Re:and coming soon... (1)

RingDev (879105) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736309)

Imagine being an "IT Guy" for a non-tech company. You've been seeing some odd network behavior, so you fire up google and search your domain for malware. It quickly identifies that Jan in Accounting has a malwar port sniffer running trying to phone home. The combination of this system and using Google for internal searches could make Google a sudden major competitor in the anti-malwar campaign.

On the broaders scale, IHPs will be able to keep an eye on their customers to see if any servers are hosting malware. And users of this tool can contact the owners/opperators of those servers to warn them that there site may have been breached.

-Rick

Use it on Slashdot (0)

MattPat (852615) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735709)

They should try this thing on Slashdot... it's quite obvious that the infamous worm Dupe.W32 has infected it.

From McAfee's security report:

The notorious Dupe.W32 worm is a high risk level Trojan that infects community technology sites via poor editing. Symptoms of the Dupe.W32 worm include duplicate posts, sometimes escalating to 3 and beyond. Though the topics that Dupe.W32 reposts are, in general, good topics, the Dupe.W32 worm wreaks its havoc by forcing the users to read through the same story again and again. To avoid being infected by this worm, please ensure that your site's editors are running the latest security updates. If issues arise, try installing Service Pack 2 on your editors.

Seriously, I like this story, it's an innovative use of Google... but each time I read it, it becomes slightly less innovative. My bet's on 5 posts before it's done.

I guess I don't understand (1, Redundant)

airlynx (957866) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735713)

I do this on a daily basis for my Windows laptop, I search through my running processes to find strange things, search them on Google, then cross-reference them from my browser history, then I interrogate my wife to find out why she visited some of the stupidest sites on the internet. That's about when I remember she's a MySpace user, and no matter what I do that laptop is screwed.

Re:I guess I don't understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735744)

Interrogate your wife? You must be one smooth operator to pull that off every day :P

Re:I guess I don't understand (1)

McFly777 (23881) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735940)

Hey, some people enjoy that sort of thing (being interrogated, tortured, etc.). Please try to keep an open mind. ;-)

Re:I guess I don't understand (2, Informative)

doti (966971) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735979)

I do this on a daily basis for my Windows laptop, I search through my running processes to find strange things, search them on Google


You really should try the excelent ProcessExplorer from SysInternals [sysinternals.com].

Re:I guess I don't understand (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736038)

Well, if it's your windows laptop, and she keeps on messing it up, maybe you shouldn't let her use it anymore. Tell her that until she learns how to use a computer without messing it up, that she isn't allowed to use it. Maybe it seems like something you'd tell a child, or you think that she won't love you anymore, it's probably the best solution.

Re:I guess I don't understand (1)

airlynx (957866) | more than 7 years ago | (#15737422)

It's OUR laptop, given to US as a gift, which altogether means it's hers. I just stick to my Linux computer and put the headaches in to fix the laptop. If I don't feel like fixing the laptop, I don't.

Either way, I sort of enjoy the torture of fixing the thing, you learn a lot that way. That and I enjoy the interrogation bit, she comes up with some great excuses that I sometimes use later at my job.

Slashdot Search Engine (0, Troll)

hublan (197388) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735729)

CowboyNeal writes: "Metasploit creator HD Moore has released an open-source search engine that finds Slashdot dupes through Google queries. From the article: 'The new DupeDot project provides a Web interface that allows anyone to enter the name of a new article and find Google results on /. for the exact same article.' The tool then searches for appropriate responses and posts a response to the new article on Slashdot proclaiming it to be a dupe. Afterwards the article shows up again."

Careful...Skynet...Matrix...DupeDot... (1, Funny)

The_REAL_DZA (731082) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735912)

...The tool then searches for appropriate responses and posts a response to the new article on Slashdot proclaiming it to be a dupe...


Sounds like this thing's just a few modules short of obsoletizing us all; give this thing a "beowulf cluster" module and a "in Soviet Russia" module and it'd be pretty well self-contained. Any day now it'll be welcoming it's overlord self...

the other way around? (2, Interesting)

luag (959452) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735734)

"to enter the name of a known virus or Trojan and find Google results for Web sites hosting malicious executables" we should be able to do it the other way around too. enter the url for websites we suspect first then list if the websites host malicious executables. imo its more useful that way :)

What agreement? (1)

RagingFuryBlack (956453) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735849)

So, oss malware? Is it free-as-in-beer or free-as-in-speech malware? Do I still need to accept an EULA to infect my friend's PCs or is it all GNU'D?

In honor of Led Zeppelin .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735773)

How Many More Times.....

post-ing the same storee!!!

bom bee da bum ....

SING IT!

This is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15735864)

This is a Vista feature, right? Is it also command line so we can set it to run every day?

I'm feeling Lucky (0, Redundant)

LordHatrus (763508) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735870)

I can't believe they didn't implement that button. That was like my favorite button. 'I'm feeling unlucky ~ Downloads the first virus found'? Would have been awesome.

Re:I'm feeling Lucky (1)

Barny (103770) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735919)

Most "free" file shareing programs have had this implemented for a long long time ;)

AWRIGHT!! an OS infector! w00t! (1)

swschrad (312009) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735889)

pray tell WTF difference is this from another virus kit? this dude's life is going to be a screaming hell when everybody tees off on him.

Re:AWRIGHT!! an OS infector! w00t! (1)

infosecpodcast (989534) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736083)

pray tell WTF difference is this from another virus kit? this dude's life is going to be a screaming hell when everybody tees off on him.
Do you mean HD Moore? lol...he's a pretty well respected security researcher. I dont think there will be "that" many people teeing off on him.

--C

Online Marketing (-1, Offtopic)

Kippy1232 (989528) | more than 7 years ago | (#15735917)

Did you know that you can get paid hundreds of dollars every month just for
completing online surveys? I got paid over $300 last month, and I have
friends who made well over $500. Huge companies literally spend millions
of dollars each year just to collect the opinions of consumers. Don't you
want to be part of the action? Complete offers, play games, refer your
friends and make lots of money and have lots of fun doing it! Check it out
today!

http://tinyurl.com/jxp4l [tinyurl.com]

gcc, worm, trojan (1)

noamt (317240) | more than 7 years ago | (#15736182)

1. It looks like there's a copy of "Worm.Bagle.Z" on GCC's server:
gcc.gnu.org / ml/gcc-prs/2004-05/msg00008 / the_message.scr
(don't open the URL from Windows, or at all. My AV detected the file as "W32.Beagle.gen", right after I downloaded it).

2. Search the engine for "worm" or "trojan" and you'll get tons of them.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...