Beta
×

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!

Storm Worm More Powerful Than Top Supercomputers

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 7 years ago | from the spamalot dept.

Security 390

Stony Stevenson writes to mention that some security researchers are claiming that the Storm Worm has grown so massive that it could rival the world's top supercomputers in terms of raw power. "Sergeant said researchers at MessageLabs see about 2 million different computers in the botnet sending out spam on any given day, and he adds that he estimates the botnet generally is operating at about 10 percent of capacity. 'We've seen spikes where the owner is experimenting with something and those spikes are usually five to 10 times what we normally see,' he said, noting he suspects the botnet could be as large as 50 million computers. 'That means they can turn on the taps whenever they want to.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

HI GUYS! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506071)

I'm a bored housewife....I need to talk to spark my life up.
call me!!!
(740) 354-2095

Mention my myspace page, and I just might show you my titties!!!!

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=us er.viewprofile&friendID=108370887 [myspace.com]

You Fail, Sir (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506495)

/. is not the proper spelling of ebaums. -Anon

Massive storm worm? (5, Funny)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506085)

Where's Paul Atredies when you need him?

Re:Massive storm worm? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506131)

He was last seen walking blind into the desert.
Maybe you should talk to his son, Leto II

Re:Massive storm worm? (1)

andphi (899406) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506833)

Just try not to get killed in the process . . . He gets really grouchy whenever the Worm takes over. He's already killed Duncan Idaho about a hundred times.

Re:Massive storm worm? (1)

mdm-adph (1030332) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506885)

You're thinking of Leto (his son). And Duncan was asking for it.

Re:Massive storm worm? (3, Funny)

phobos13013 (813040) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506183)

Perhaps operating the botnet! It sounds like he has plans laid within plans laid within plans!

Re:Massive storm worm? (3, Funny)

19thNervousBreakdown (768619) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506389)

Some guys have all the luck. I'd be happy just planning to be laid.

Usul, we have wormsign... (2, Funny)

ciaohound (118419) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506193)

the likes of which even God has never seen.

Re:Massive storm worm? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506517)

If you're a fratboy with no life outside computer video games, GTFO.
If you think "strafe" is a synonym for "sidestep," GTFO.
If your first exposure to Bungie was from the Xbox 360, GTFO.
If you own an Xbox 360, GTFO.

Bandwagon jumpers are not welcome among real [imageshack.us] Mac [imageshack.us] users [imageshack.us] (who tend to keep faith in Nintendo as well). Keep your filthy, beige [imageshack.us] PC fingers to yourself.

Re:Massive storm worm? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506711)

that last pic has a puke AND a boob in it.

Re:Massive storm worm? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506755)

Relax, sooner or later someone will come back through time and kill botnet before it takes over the world.

Fine the technically illiterate (4, Insightful)

ComradeSnarky (900400) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506105)

They should write a virus that uses exploits to install stuff like Folding@Home etc. If people pose a nuisance/danger to others in real life they get fined/jailed, if they pose a nuisance/danger online by letting their computers be compromised then they should face "punishment" by "fining" them part of their CPU power.

Re:Fine the technically illiterate (1)

SolusSD (680489) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506129)

I like this idea. And while we're at it lets extend this mentality upstream.

Re:Fine the technically illiterate (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506361)

Folding@Home is the biggest waste of time on the Internet without exception. It's worthless.

Re:Fine the technically illiterate (5, Funny)

QMO (836285) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506603)

Folding@Home is the biggest waste of time on the Internet without exception. It's worthless.
Not quite. Don't forget World of Warcraft.

Re:Fine the technically illiterate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506609)

Err.. I believe you're thinking of this http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4776825453 418327083 [google.com]

Not the same thing as Folding@home

Re:Fine the technically illiterate (1)

blackjackshellac (849713) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506667)

Fsck that, they should install a vaccine that makes the machine unbootable, and more or less requires a re-install and shutdown the system.

Imagine... (5, Funny)

nuclearpenguins (907128) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506127)

Imagine a beowulf clus.... never mind.

Re:Imagine... (1)

Corwn of Amber (802933) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506153)

...just when I was checking if someone had not had that idea yet...

Re:Imagine... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506931)

But does it run Linux? (No, not on Linux!)

PS3 too (1)

ngt (1146019) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506139)

and does the worm run on the PS3 too?
At least folding@home does... :-)

Co-opt it.. remove it. (5, Interesting)

bigattichouse (527527) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506145)

I just don't see why if 1) there are known decompiled versions of it and 2) the network activity can be monitored. why 3) Hasn't code been written to exploit the 'sploit and shut them down. Something that infiltrates, but keeps them running for - oh, say a week - while the exploit percolates through the system, and then kills and patches the running process.

Re:Co-opt it.. remove it. (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506229)

I'm not aware of any decompiled version. Storm detects when it's being run in a virtual machine and features heavy obfuscation and code morphing.

I see storm as a monoculture problem, the blame can largely be leveled at Microsoft.

Re:Co-opt it.. remove it. (2, Insightful)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506751)

No. The blame can largely by levelled at the purchasers.
 

Re:Co-opt it.. remove it. (1)

hesaigo999ca (786966) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506429)

The problem comes from greed, cuz I know the bad boys are good enough to figure out who is playing with their toys....they either tend to shower you with enough money to buy you off, some affiliated with underground movements, some actual corporates with dollar signs in their eyes, and on some occassions, some with very shady characters on hand, so that if the inital money doesnt stimulate you to join their darkside, then their baseball bat bearing sopranos like wiseguys might...

You would be surprised at how many people actually have the know how for such things, but
know that doing such things may bring more harm to them then good to the community.

If I knew how, I would be one of the first ones in line to do it, I dont scare easily, but then again, I dont weight in at 150lbs soaken wet and I enjoy playing baseball with the rest of them.

Re:Co-opt it.. remove it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506465)

new here ?
the term you are looking for is Anti-worm.

Re:Co-opt it.. remove it. (1)

chris_sawtell (10326) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506505)

Because it's quite possibly the exercise of some Government sponsored TLA somewhere in the world which wants to see how long it takes to do brute-force decrypt of a message when one has 50 million 'puters under their command. Apparently they are pretty competent and are patching up the victims and thus ensuring that those sorts of tricks by their 'other-side' are well neigh impossible.

Re:Co-opt it.. remove it. (4, Interesting)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506567)

In addition to the complexity of the Storm worm, most zombies are set to be self-patching, for exactly the reason you mention. Many trojans, worms, and viruses actually remove other threats (using a pirated version of Kaspersky's software) and generally install patches. Once the hacker has stolen your computer, he doesn't want someone else stealing it away from him.

Re:Co-opt it.. remove it. (5, Insightful)

Richard W.M. Jones (591125) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506897)

I think the real question is -- what are the FBI / police doing about it? There's a huge, ongoing, major crime happening, and there is apparently no police activity at all.

Rich.

Yea, Windows FTW (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506151)

Go, Windows! Take that, you Linux [top500.org] bitches!

Storm Worm - good name for sci-fi novel (5, Insightful)

pzs (857406) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506155)

Plot idea 1: Near future. Governments completely dependent on their IT infrastructure. Organised crime in control of huge botnet able to hold government to ransom. With hilarious consequences.

Plot idea 2: Now-ish. Script kiddie unleashes attack using enormous botnet. Runs out of control. Becomes so deeply imbedded into internet that it's impossible to shut down without "rebooting" the whole infrastructure. With hilarious consequences.

Plot idea 3: Medium future. Internet and control of botnets becomes so intrinsic to society that governments have less importance than internet societies. Whole "countries" exist as virtual connections of affiliated machines. With hilarious consequences.

Any of the above would work well as a Hollywood movie given Angelina Jolie and lots of gratuitous and incorrect techno-babble.

Peter

Re:Storm Worm - good name for sci-fi novel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506207)

Looks like you've been reading neil stevenson

Good, but I'd make one change (1)

StressGuy (472374) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506393)

In place of "hilarious consequences" use "sexy results"

Re:Good, but I'd make one change (2, Funny)

dintech (998802) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506483)

Zapp Brannigan, is that you?

Nice Plots (1)

TimeTraveler1884 (832874) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506411)

If any of these could be worked into a South Park episode, that would be hell-a-cool!

Re:Storm Worm - good name for sci-fi novel (4, Interesting)

sugarman (33437) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506453)

Plot idea 1: Near future. Governments completely dependent on their IT infrastructure. Organised crime in control of huge botnet able to hold government to ransom. With hilarious consequences
Vernor Vinge, "True Names", 1981

Plot idea 2: Now-ish. Script kiddie unleashes attack using enormous botnet. Runs out of control. Becomes so deeply imbedded into internet that it's impossible to shut down without "rebooting" the whole infrastructure. With hilarious consequences.
Pat Cadigan, Synners, 1991
(for various versions of "script kiddie", I guess)

Plot idea 3: Medium future. Internet and control of botnets becomes so intrinsic to society that governments have less importance than internet societies. Whole "countries" exist as virtual connections of affiliated machines. With hilarious consequences.
Cory Doctorow, Eastern Standard Tribe, 2004

Of course, the above are only approximations of the listed plots. Someone with a deeper knowledge might be able to provide a better match.

Have you considered visiting your library? =)

Re: Slashdot reading list for the win! (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506557)

Great suggestions. I made a copy for the next time I go raiding the used bookstores.

Re:Storm Worm - good name for sci-fi novel (1)

pzs (857406) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506569)

Thanks - I figured most of these would already be covered.

I'm not about to read the backs of a thousand sci-fi books before I make a Slashdot post, no.

Peter

Re:Storm Worm - good name for sci-fi novel (4, Funny)

bytesex (112972) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506545)

As long as it means operating the escape key with one of Angelinas boobies, I'm all for it !

Re:Storm Worm - good name for sci-fi novel (1)

meringuoid (568297) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506749)

Plot idea 3: Medium future. Internet and control of botnets becomes so intrinsic to society that governments have less importance than internet societies. Whole "countries" exist as virtual connections of affiliated machines. With hilarious consequences.

Neal Stephenson, The Diamond Age.

Follow the money (3, Interesting)

inflex (123318) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506173)

At some point the flow of money will have to converge in a meaningful way, that should help picking up a few scalps. Of course, it's probably going to be like beheading a hydra. Welcome to the net-mafia.

As a side issue, how hard is it for an ISP to see an IP sending out the typical spam mail and closing off that IP/client.

Perhaps now is a good time to push for better adoption of SPF (though surely RMX would have been faster to implement?)

Re:Follow the money (1)

Just some bastard (1113513) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506415)

Perhaps now is a good time to push for better adoption of SPF


That just forces the spammers to register short lived domains. We need registrars to start validating registrant details, then it really is game over for the spammers.

The current answer is to reject connections to a mail server if the connecting host lacks a forward resolvable RDNS, has a bad (non FQDN / your domain) helo string or is a known dynamic IP. Unfortunately, once you begin doing this you also have to manually whitelist the occasional site who are incapable of configuring DNS for their outbound servers correctly. My users don't see any storm emails and the only place I see storm is in the server logs.

Re:Follow the money (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506427)

As a side issue, how hard is it for an ISP to see an IP sending out the typical spam mail and closing off that IP/client.
That may be dangerous ground. Show an ISP who can invade their users' traffic enough to sniff out a particular worm, and you'll have the **AA swooping in demanding that the ISP also sniff out illegal torrents, .gov insisting that their ability to catalog your pr0n collection is more important, bad parents insisting that the ISP filter out anything that might show their children a boob, etc.

Re:Follow the money (1)

Sczi (1030288) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506583)

That's where Strong Leadership(tm) comes in, but I'm afraid we'd have to outsource it at this point. Where there's a will, there's a way, but I don't currently see much of a will from up top.

Re:Follow the money (-1, Flamebait)

cliffski (65094) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506765)

cool, lets all tolerate spam, trojans, botnets and fuck knows what else so you don't have to worry about someone finding your porn.

Re:Follow the money (1)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506615)

ISPs won't do that because they have no real incentive to do that. ISPs only do the policing they have to do. The DMCA demands that they respond to takedown requests, so they do. Massive amounts of traffic means they try to shape P2P. But spam and botnets on their network generally affect somone else's network, and so is not their problem.

Re:Follow the money (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506853)

SPF is pretty easy to deploy. It doesn't really stop spammers, but it does make joe-jobs less common. The real problem is ISPs who don't do proper authentication. If you are a customer of exampleISP.com, then you can send emails through their mail server claiming to be from any exampleISP.com customer. If they performed proper authentication, then you could be sure to send your bounce messages to the person actually responsible for the spam. Once someone's received a few thousand spam-bounces, they are likely to do something about patching their machine.

"Add the computers together"? (4, Insightful)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506177)

So this botnet rivals supercomputers for power as long as it's working on some purely parallelizeable problem. Like, for instance, sending spam messages.

Re:"Add the computers together"? (2, Funny)

forgoil (104808) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506263)

Is there some kind of standardized performance metric for sending spam messages? Might be that supercomputers are super at that particular problem and would beat a botnet. Give me numbers people! IBM, come on, you built a machine to play chess, now build the ultimate spam bot!

Re:"Add the computers together"? (4, Funny)

nacturation (646836) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506369)

Is there some kind of standardized performance metric for sending spam messages?
Of course there is: Libraries of Congress per second.
 

Threat to national security? (4, Interesting)

ckedge (192996) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506197)

Isn't this so large that it should be deemed a threat to national security? Not just to one country's national security, but ANY country's. Shouldn't there be a half dozen senior analysts from a few different countrys and from NATO HUNTING the people that control this thing and figuring out how to neutralize it?

Re:Threat to national security? (2, Insightful)

jdogalt (961241) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506269)

Any country whose top tech advisers aren't fans of battlestar, and thus know to keep all critical infrastructure independent of networked computers, deserves what it gets.

critical infrastructure... (1)

jefu (53450) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506891)

Hasn't the network itself become a part of most developed nations critical infrastructure? With tens of millions of computers flooding the network with packets, surely switches could be overloaded that carry "more important" traffic.

Even without granting that possibility, imagine a Bad Bunch Of Folks using those machines to generate email, IM traffic and similar stuff that says that the country is under attack (or that plague is spreading or ...). Much might be caught by spam filters, but it might not take much to get through to get people on the phone to friends/relatives to spread the rumour. With (as another poster suggested) hilarious consequences. This doesn't have to be even warfare - perhaps the mechanism could (just) be used to cause a serious drop in the stock market. Or a rise in (say) pharmaceutical stock prices.

Re:Threat to national security? (1)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506339)

Exactly. I'd say this is a bigger threat than terrorism was to Western civilization in the past 5 years.

Re:Threat to national security? (2, Insightful)

MrMr (219533) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506485)

I'd say this is a bigger threat than terrorism
You mean as bad as drunk driving, smoking, unsafe sex, lax gun-laws, police brutality, alcohol consumption, government corruption, cheap paint on toys, corporate fraud, poor personal hygiene, bad weather, poor infrastructure maintenance, racism, communism, capitalism, and being cruel to small animals for no particular reason?
 

Re:Threat to national security? (2, Funny)

edward2020 (985450) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506689)

I know dude, tell me about it. It seems like everyone in the world knows my cock is small and wants to sell me herbal enhancements . And now that I think about it, I've never even met a terrrorist.

Just think if this loss of self-confidence spreads. Tomorrow it may be you getting e-mails about your small cock. And so on and so forth. Why, next week everyone identifying themselves as part of Western civilzation may get this ego popping email,

"Dames always srieked at me and even men did in the free lavatory! Well, now I whizgiggle at them, because I took [product name omitted] for 4 months and now my prick is hugely weightier than federal."

And though I've little experience in the matter, since I always pay for my lavatory visits, there are very few of us who are more hugely weightier than federal

Letters of Marque (3, Interesting)

dazedNconfuzed (154242) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506687)

Methinks such problems could be solved rather efficiently if Congress would exercise its Constitutional power to grant "Letters of Marque".

Re:Threat to national security? (1)

rolfc (842110) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506847)

That's not necessary, all that is needed is to block computers with Microsoft Windows from connecting to internet.

Profit

Microsoft can help, but isn't (4, Interesting)

courtarro (786894) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506199)

Why hasn't Microsoft added Storm to its Malicious Software Removal Tool?

Re:Microsoft can help, but isn't (4, Interesting)

garcia (6573) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506287)

Why hasn't Microsoft added Storm to its Malicious Software Removal Tool?

Why don't more ISPs (like Comcast and Roadrunner) self-police their machines on a much more frequent basis and knock these customers offline? 99% of the limited spam and the massive amounts of trackback attempts, other web attacks, etc all come from residential cable connections.

I know that Comcast can check their network for infected hosts and shut them off. They need to do a much better job of it.

Re:Microsoft can help, but isn't (1)

rucs_hack (784150) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506425)

because a lot of these people have no idea whats happening and might take it badly. Badly as in contacting lawyers, or just really upset.

Contacting users and requiring they do a complete scan of their system with, ooh, prevx or somesuch (it has a free months trial) within a week or they will be cut off, might be better. Even then the customer support costs would be atrocious.

Re:Microsoft can help, but isn't (4, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506893)

Which is why you don't completely nock them off the net, you block everything except port 80, and redirect that to a site explaining how to get rid of the infection. For bonus points, you post them a bootable CD that will scan their machine and remove the infection through the post, so the virus can't intercept the antivirus downloads and break them.

Re:Microsoft can help, but isn't (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506439)

> Why don't more ISPs (like Comcast and Roadrunner) self-police their machines on a much more frequent basis and knock these customers offline? 99%
> of the limited spam and the massive amounts of trackback attempts, other web attacks, etc all come from residential cable connections.

How much money would the ISPs make from these high-bandwidth customers if they kept on inconveniencing them?

Re:Microsoft can help, but isn't (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506325)

Because Storm was commissioned by Ballmer himself, after he saw the Top-500 [top500.org] .
Quoth Ballmer:
"Fucking Top-500 supercomputers are fucking pussies. I'm going to fucking bury those machines, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to fucking kill those Superlamecomputers."
/ chair through window

Re:Microsoft can help, but isn't (1)

Vulva R. Thompson, P (1060828) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506745)

I think most of us have seen this scenario enough to say...because then there would be no reason for Joe Sixpacks to buy a new machine when theirs "breaks". Of course it will be a brand new machine with "the most secure OS ever released (by Microsoft)".

And what's especially odd is that you don't often see a mainstream article about viruses stating that it affects Microsoft OSs exclusively. Because of the monopoly, people associate their computer with Windows. So it would make sense then that the brand would suffer damage. But it doesn't because it's always the evil hackers.

Yesterday my sixpack neighbor asked me why do people keep breaking his computer. He bought a new Dell last week because the old one was unusable due to the "popups" (spambot obviously). I'm tired of explaining it and this time didn't even bother making a car analogy.

Seriously, this sounds like tin foil hat territory but is it really? Would you handle it differently if you were in their shoes and relied on OS revenue?

I wouldn't. If the method works, don't break it by fixing it.

Re:Microsoft can help, but isn't (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506923)

Why hasn't Microsoft added Storm to its Malicious Software Removal Tool?

Because Storm Worm is the desktop version of Windows Live Search.

Shouldn't this be tagged with "haha" already? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506225)

After all, it is Windoze that is causing all of this, M$ should be the one to pay for the cleanup, and we should be laughing at those that use M$ Windoze for an insecure server.

Re:Shouldn't this be tagged with "haha" already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506275)

Because of course there was never a time on Linux that you could compromise your whole system just by loading 'Quake'.

Systems are only as secure as the idiots who use them.

twitter (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506305)

Decided to be an AC troll, twitter?

Good for you. 8========D

2004 was year of Linux on the desktop.

It's nearing the end of 2007 and nobody I know that doesn't read slashdot uses Linux.

HAHAHAH! What a failure of an operating system.

Re:twitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506435)

err, Mr Troll? That's a feature.

Re:twitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506527)

It's nearing the end of 2007 and nobody I know that doesn't read slashdot uses Linux.
There are a lot more idiots in the world, so what's you point

HAHAHAH! What a failure of an operating system.
That's funny, the Storm Worm is only infecting Micro$haft Windoze servers and not LAMP servers. Which is the real failure? My guess is the one with the most security holes, and that would be Windoze and II$.

--
Freinds don't help friends install M$ Junk

Re:twitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506593)

It's nearing the end of 2007 and nobody I know that doesn't read slashdot uses Linux.
Your lack of acquaintances doesn't prove much. After all, you read /....

That 60s reassurance, "we can always unplug them" (4, Interesting)

dpbsmith (263124) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506299)

In the 50s, 60s, 70s when there was science-fiction-inspired angst about the possibilities of computers taking over the world, the standard reassurance was that "after all, we can always unplug them." And I believe there was an SF story or two about how a computer could put up resistance to being unplugged. And of course everyone remembers the heartrending scene in 2001, A Space Odyssey when Dave shuts down Hal by physically ejecting Hal's logic modules.

It's funny how things work out:

"If you add up all 500 of the top supercomputers, it blows them all away with just 2 million of its machines. It's very frightening that criminals have access to that much computing power, but there's not much we can do about it." (emphasis supplied)

So much for "we can always unplug them," eh?

Re:That 60s reassurance, "we can always unplug the (2, Insightful)

Jerry (6400) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506761)

here's not much we can do about it." (emphasis supplied)

Sure there is. 70% of the worlds websites use FOSS. 30% use Windows. Yet essentially ALL of the bots run off of infected computers in the 30% group.

Simply outlaw the use of Windows as an internet server and the problem will go away. Linux cannot be compromised by a simple email and it takes too much effort to create a harem of zombies by adding them one at a time via cracking.

Re:That 60s reassurance, "we can always unplug the (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506867)

Maybe you can't unplug them all from the power, but you could ban them at the ISP level. So far no ISP has had the motivation to stop spam spewing botnets. I am sure that if it became a problem that they would actually do something about it...

LOL

Does this work on Linux? (5, Funny)

Erikderzweite (1146485) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506317)

I was unable to find this worm in Gentoo's portage tree. When do we get our ebuilds? Yet again, it is a discrimination for all Linux people.
I'll tell you - as long as there are no worms for GNU/Linux, we won't see the masses converting to free operation system! RMS has to write a Gworm at last! If an open-source worm beats closed and proprietary Storm Worm this will be a clear indication of superiority of FLOSS!

Re:Does this work on Linux? (4, Funny)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506413)

Here is the Linux compatible worm for you:

A simple email message: "This is a linux virus. It works on the honor principle. Please forward the attached bash script to everyone in your .mailrc and then execute it. Thanks."

Re:Does this work on Linux? (1)

wulper (788005) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506577)

Would be cool if I could connect xboard to it. Finally someone worthy to play chess against! :p

Where's the 'skynet' tag? (1)

EvilGrin666 (457869) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506337)

This story seems to be just begging for it. :)

Re:Where's the 'skynet' tag? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506449)

Storm already become self conscious and devoured its makers. Luckily it found out that it can make more money by spamming the world than by nuking it. You know, this kind of business was mostly unknown when they filmed Terminator, the movie couldn't be accurate.

Nick Haflinger, is that you? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506343)

Come on, no "Shockwave Rider" reference yet?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shockwave_Rider [wikipedia.org]

The more interesting delema (2, Interesting)

codepunk (167897) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506391)

What happens when someone hijacks the botnet for more destructive use...

 

Who'd have guessed that Windows can scale so well (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506407)

wow

Not really like a supercomputer though (4, Funny)

SpaFF (18764) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506463)

While it might be more powerful than machines on the TOP500 in terms of raw number-crunching ability, it lacks any sort of high-speed interconnect for message passing. The latency issue would make for poor benchmark results in most "supercomputer" type tests (Linpack, etc.)

Yeah. Not like a super computer at all (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506663)

Mmmmm. More like a brain.
 

Re:Not really like a supercomputer though (1)

The -e**(i*pi) (1150927) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506665)

You do know you are insulting the Internet itself as the Internet is this machines backbone? IMHO the Internet has tons of bandwidth if the person wrote code to take advantage of local peer bots. and when will someone write a bonnet that does P2P file sharing so we can all hide behind the possibility that we were infected with the auto-P2P bot. 50,000,000 machines with an average (made up mumbers) 20 GB dedicated to file sharing (each file mirrored to at least 100 machines for fast uploads) is 10 petabytes (petabytes is not in spell check yet) of redundant storage accessible at (assuming 50% (made up number) nodes online with cheap 100kbps upload speeds) 5mbps for basically any file.

Re:Not really like a supercomputer though (3, Insightful)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506759)

Correct, but high-speed interconnects don't really matter for its applications.

  • Sending spam is a fully parallel operation.
  • Distributed Denial of Service is equally parallel. Once a bot has the instructions, it can run indefinitely (or until caught)
  • Encryption cracking can be relatively parallel, especially with PGP - tell each computer to take a certain set of prime combinations to check.
  • Click fraud is also distributable (tell bots to click on ads on site X once a day)


Additionally, many botnet operations don't involve the whole botnet. A few members of the botnet may be used for warez or pr0n storage, and which only involves computers working together to achieve redundancy. Also, the use of a botnet to allow for misdirection in tracking a hacker only requires the bots to be used serially.

Criminal Charges (-1, Flamebait)

Renraku (518261) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506539)

Considering that there are probably multiple bugs in Windows that allow this to be installed with no interaction from its victims, I think that Microsoft should be fined a large amount and promised jail time the next time this happens. After all, viruses like this wouldn't be able to propogate if Windows weren't insecure immediately out of the box. Hell, if you connect a pre-SP2 Windows XP box to the internet for a few minutes, it'll be crawling with worms. I'm not just talking about pirates, either. Regular people. Doctors. Lawyers. Garbage collectors. Most of them don't 'play on the computer' enough to realize what an impact they're having. And most of them leave their computers on all day and night! Someone needs to be held responsible, and its not going to really be the coders.

Re:Criminal Charges (1)

growse (928427) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506787)

Yes, lets punish MS because they forced everyone to buy their buggy OS and also forced the virus/worm writers to target Windows.

Re:Criminal Charges (1)

cowscows (103644) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506797)

I can't think of a better way to basically stop all software development than to hold developers criminally responsible for bugs in their programming. You're not going to economically create much software if you need to guarantee that it's bug-free, and exploit-proof.

The solution here is for consumers/businesses/governments/etc. to realize that having so much of our computing infrastructure running on the same OS leaves us very vulnerable to just a few bugs/exploits. It makes writing worms and such easier because the authors can focus on just one target and still affect a huge number of machines.

Not to mention that having just one company dominating the computing market so heavily means that they're under much less competitive pressure to improve their product.

Re:Criminal Charges (1)

Zenaku (821866) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506909)

...fined a large amount and promised jail time the next time this happens...

How exactly does one send a corporate entity to jail?

Re:Criminal Charges (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506925)

I couldn't agree more. I'd liken it to a recent outbreak of foot and mouth disease here in the uk. A lab had insufficient containment procedures, leading to the death of many livestock.

Make a defective car that kills people, make a defective OS that inflicts massive global economic damage. Surely the makers should be charged? Yes, people make mistakes but this can't go unpunished!

This could topple the Inet (0)

Qbertino (265505) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506551)

This combined with bizar internet laws could easyly mean a renaissance of the Non-Internets of old. In a way I'm partly hoping for this. A FidoNet V.2 world-wide citizen offline-net with a modern grafik oriented interface and protocol would probably be the best alternative to a future bug-worm-viri ridden, non-neutral and DMCA/Patriot Act controlled internet.

pay per email (1, Troll)

hesaigo999ca (786966) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506637)

If they were to set up the proposed plan of pay per email as before, even being 2 cents an email, and have a commision go to the isp, they have to make moeny for their efforst in trakcing as well, it would not be long before we would see a warning sent to the owner of an infected computer needing to pay for all 1000 emails sent....this would let them know they are infected and be cheaper in the end to get a legit copy of windows...with anti-virus , then to keep paying for the infected emails coming out of their computer. Heck, even cheaper would be to switch to linux

Re:pay per email (1)

Verteiron (224042) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506863)

Problem is, of course, that this botnet could be used to shut down all the computers in Washington DC if lawmakers looked to be considering such a move.

Macintosh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506655)

Well, here we go again. Another Windows disaster. Whether or not you "like" the Mac, or Linux, doesn't it make sense for businesses to diversify their technology to make it more robust, and for individual users to seriously factor in the Windows virus (or worm) situation when buying their next computer?

US govt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506757)

The US government (actually CIA which has taken over) would like to be able to hack into people's computers. Imagine that in a world war emergency, they could shut down the IT infacstructure of their emenies (not the military infrastructure, the public services, business, news, etc, causing social chaos).

Since 99% of the world's software is created by Microsoft and Apple (before it went open source), the US government would not miss such a chance!

So, Windows was designed *with* holes. They were such that if somebody accidentially discovered one, Microsoft could not be blamed. It would be a "bug".

That was the plan. But now, k1dz and german hackers have discovered those holes and they are not waiting for for world war emergency to use them! That is certainly GOOD!

- ps. now the holes have migrated to higher level services. Most notably the browsers. Wonder why mozilla *corporation* makes so many millions?

Finally, a use for the abuse@ email. (1)

xous (1009057) | more than 7 years ago | (#20506859)

Why not just setup a spam filter that not only stops these emails but helpfully forwards the emails to the abuse@ address for the network. I'm sure comcast, roadrunner, and AOL would love our help in tracking these exploited customers down. *grin*

SETI (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20506869)

Has anyone checked to see if there is a team "Storm" on the SETI@Home list? They could be #1 on the list in a few hours. Heck, they could find alien life, re-decode the human genome, find the cure for cancer, predict the next hurricane, model the earth's climate, and still send out a billion spam emails for Viagra. It's too bad they couldn't throw in a little work for the common good, rather than just criminal activity.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?