Re: Benign Worms

[Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu]

On Sat, 14 May 2005 10:50:18 PDT, Eric Paynter said:
> On Sat, May 14, 2005 9:30 am, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu said:
> > Even if you *do* manage to code the worm correctly, all it takes is for
> > *one* person visiting your site to have plugged their laptop into the net,
> > and you're at least potentially screwed.
>
> Hopefully as a minimum, one would code it to be limited to certain
> subnets. That way, even if it does get the laptop, when the laptop goes
> onto the Internet, it will not scan from the NIC with a public IP. It will
> just go dormant.

No, I meant "visiting salecritter  plugs into your net, your worm accidentally
trashes his laptop ("Hey, all *MY* boxen are Win2000, how was *I* to know that it
would mess up an XP box?"), and said salescritter and employer take action about it.

> > And I posit that if your network is either small enough or run *that*
> > fascistly that you are ready to swear on a Bible in court,
> > under penalty of perjury, that you *know* everything that's connected to
> > it, then you don't need a worm to fix it.

> Although I would still suggest that a worm is not the way to go. Put the
> "hack and patch" functionality on a server and point the server at each
> subnet you want to target. Much safer. Much easier to control.

Exactly.  Among other things, you don't have to worry that some user 3 generations
of worm down the way removes some file he doesn't recognize, causing the worm
to mutate.

Attachment: _bin
Description:

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/