Most Dangerous Types of Spyware are on the Rise: How to Choose the Weapon

Code NOD32 Update 31/7/2007

Username: AV-6299263
Password: oy89k56mon

Username: AV-6299188
Password: vku8u21e6k

Username: AV-6299269
Password: mycw1edobf

UserName: AV-6313712
PassWord: nuifjuxgj1

UserName: AV-6313720
PassWord: kj88dqbs82

UserName: AV-6313730
PassWord: gh7knumjgu

UserName: AV-6313737
PassWord: x82yfukrfo


Most Dangerous Types of Spyware are on the Rise: How to Choose the Weapon



Bad News - the Threat is Bigger than it Seemed

How recently it was ? when even many journalists thought that spyware gathers mostly information to be used for targeted advertising. Definitions like "spyware, a.k.a. adware, is?" were pretty common in articles. Keyloggers and system monitors were mentioned as dangerous, but relatively rare. Until the Spy Audit survey made by ISP Earthlink and Webroot Software clearly showed - they are not rare at all.

The results of the survey are here:

http://www.earthlink.net/spyaudit/press/ and http://www.earthlink.net/about/press/pr_spyauditsurvey/

Reading them will be time well-spent for everybody who uses Internet and at least sometimes deals with information valuable enough to be stolen; in fact, it means just everybody.

"Industry experts suggest that these types of programs [i.e. spyware in general] may reside on up to 90 percent of all Internet-connected computers" ? that's the exact quote. Considering the number of computers scanned during this survey (which lasted for a whole year 2004), there is nothing left but to come to the conclusion ? it must be true to fact.

Despite the fact that one of the Spy Audit authors is an anti-spyware vendor, there is no doubt that the results are trustworthy ? there has been more than 4.6 million system scans made in 2004. It seems that the results of the survey might be like the bolt from the blue even for the specialists, not to mention general public.

16.48% of all scanned consumer PCs in 2004 had a system monitor installed. It means that 16.48% of these users were definitely under monitoring (who monitors them ? that's another question). 16.69% had a Trojan horse program, and this is a troubling sign, too ? it is a keylogging module that Trojans often have inside. "Information-stealing Trojan" in descriptions most often means "keylogger-containing Trojan". Both figures give us an overwhelming 33.17% PCs contaminated with some program with information stealing capability. Even if not all these Trojans were information-stealing ones, the situation is distressing anyway.

Schools of Phish and Herds of Trojan Horses

"Traditional" phishing and spoofing (sending emails linked to a bogus bank Web site and waiting for unwitting customers) are, unfortunately, not new phenomena. It is a modernized two-stage scam which includes contaminating the victim's machine with a keylogger-containing Trojan horse program that is spreading like a wildfire now.

This scheme is without doubt much more dangerous; in this case the victim needn't follow the link in the email. Trojan horse lurks in the background until the victim types particular titles or URLs into his browser. Once the user visits one of a number of banking Web sites the malicious code is triggered into action, capturing passwords and taking screenshots. Then the information is sent to remote hackers who can use it to break into the bank account and steal money.

There were several outbreaks in activity of such information-stealing Trojans which targeted bank customers in 2004. Actually, such a scam was first used in Brazil ? when the notorious Trojan named Troj/Banker-AJ appeared, experts recalled that the security firm Sophos had warned earlier in 2004 about criminals who used similar techniques to break into Brazilian online bank accounts.

Crooks may use pretty ingenious and "efficient"(if such a word could be appropriate for this activity) techniques to place the Trojan into users' PCs ? letters can be mimicking CNN news alerts, or offering to reserve the very latest book about Harry Potter in the series before it is published in July. Who knows what will they invent next?

Looking for Solutions to the Problem

In 2004 it become as clear as day to anyone - from being not much more than a nuisance for PC users, spyware turned into one of the major threats to information security. Since the Internet has become a part of daily life and business, rapid growth of such kinds of cybercrime as identity theft and phishing endanger the whole society. Some types of spyware, namely software capable of stealing valuable information (like passwords, SSNs), certainly facilitate these crimes.

Software vendors by all means are responding to the threat to meet the enormous demand for anti-spyware protection.

Several big anti-virus vendors, such as Norton and McAfee, have already begun providing anti-spyware protection as well. Microsoft also joined the anti-spyware market this year (and has already become a target for the malicious Trojan called Bankash-A; fortunately, no serious damages reported so far). Symantec plans to announce new features to fight spyware in some of its enterprise antivirus and intrusion prevention products.

Besides, there also are ? literally - hundreds of stand-alone anti-spyware developers and vendors. The number of anti-spyware software they all develop, promote and sell is constantly growing - and will grow in future. So will the profits. According to predictions from the market advisory firm IDC, the market for anti-spyware solutions is expected to boom in the next few years. Anti-spyware software revenues will soar from US$12 million in 2003 to $305 million in 2008.

But what about end users ? are they going to benefit from such a variety of anti-spyware solutions available at the market? Or will they just feel bewildered and lost in all this mass of ads offering instant relief from nasty and dangerous spyware? It looks like most people are already confused because advertising is pretty much alike ? how to distinguish a high-quality product from some hit-or-miss software developers fabricated in haste just to get quick profit?

What a user can (actually must) do is to know what exactly he or she is buying or installing for free. Here are several simple common-sense tips:

The first step is to visit the site of the company that produces this product. Look it through. Read "about us" section. How long does this company exist? Ignore "testimonials" ? there is no guarantee that it wasn't the company's PR manager who wrote them. It would be better to search, say, Google groups for opinions.

A good old background check will also do a lot of good. It takes some time, though ? but peace of mind later is worth half an hour's browsing the Web now. The simplest way is to search for the product's name along with such words like "installs", "spyware", "adware", "popups", etc.

There are even lists of suspicious, low-performing, or adware-installing products. See, for example, http://www.spywarewarrior.com/rogue_anti-spyware.htm - an ample list of anti-spyware you'd better not buy. By the way, the whole this site is worth studying thoroughly.

The fact that you are not a tech person doesn't mean you can afford not knowing the basic principles these products are based on. What a user can expect from an anti-spy product and what is simply impossible?

Most anti-spyware products apply signature databases, i.e. rely on simple pattern-matching technique. Detecting spy software is the crucial step of the whole process ? all the protection depends on whether the anti-spy software is able to detect as many malicious programs as possible. The bigger the database is and the more often it is updated, the more reliable protection the product will provide.

Signature base, which most anti-spy products depend on, is actually the "list" of signatures ? small pieces of spy programs' codes. Anti-virus or anti-spy program actually scans the system and compares its codes with those in signature bases. So, in this case only the spies whose signatures already are in the base will be detected and eventually "caught". As long as anti-spy software is regularly updated and the system doesn't come across some unknown spy product, everything is all right.

The problem is that there is good deal of people capable of creating something brand-new, unknown to anti-spyware developers. The period of time when a new spy already exists, but the updates have not been released yet, is the very time when cybercriminals make their biggest profits.

The advantage of signature base analysis is that programs based on this method of detection can be of wider range ? it is possible to include signatures from different types of spyware and adware into a single database. However, regular release of updates for these bases becomes crucial. If the developer fails to do it properly and on time, there is a considerable risk for such a program to become "Jack of all trades and a master of none."

The conclusion is simple ? if a product applies signature database, it's better to choose anti-spyware with the biggest and most frequently updated base. Don't expect absolute protection ? with this technique it is simply unattainable.

But in case of information-stealing programs, like keyloggers or keylogging-containing Trojans, a single "overlooked" program may mean lost valuable data. Since signature analysis can't ensure protection against constantly appearing brand-new keyloggers, blocking the very process of keylogging would be better. Such a technology already exists, and it may be the next step towards more reliable protection against the most malicious types of spy programs.

Alexandra Gamanenko currently works at Raytown Corporation, LLC - the independent software developing company, which created the technology capable of blocking the very process of keylogging. Visit its website: http://www.anti-keyloggers.com

Antivirus Software ? Get The Bugs Before They Get You!

Code NOD32 UPdate 30/07/2007

Username: AV-6284473
Password: nv8tmcd9m7

Username: AV-6284477
Password: m5r8q4hij0

UserName: AV-5813203
Password: bf6gp20qq8

UserName: AV-5894384
Password: 3aoitu7sbx
.......................................................

Antivirus Software ? Get The Bugs Before They Get You!


You turn on your computer, and it doesn't look quite right. Maybe your icons have changed, or the background picture is wrong. Some options are disabled. Even worse, you may not be able to boot your computer up at all. Guess what ? it's probably got a virus.

In today's online world, protecting your computer from all the nasty things online is vital. Viruses can cause obvious issues, as described above, but they can also run silently in the background, propagating themselves across your computer and transferring on to the computers of people you know. Mostly, you only know you have a virus when substantial damage has already been done.

Some common signs of a virus include:

* Programs working erratically
* Computer locks up
* Greyed out options
* The browser home page has changed
* Icons have changed
* Difficulties starting up the computer

There is a solution! Antivirus software is readily available, and the good ones are very efficient at dealing with viruses in all their many and varied mutations. Basically, if you're online, you need this type of software.

So which one do you choose? For starters, be careful of using something free off the internet, particularly if it's one you've never heard of. Sometimes these programs are a way of implanting more viruses on your computer. Some of the better known brands give you the option of doing a free scan online, which is useful, but not a long term solution.

It's really important to choose well-known antivirus software. Ask friends, or someone computer savvy, for their recommendations. It may be worth visiting a computer store and buying it there, rather than online ? after all, if they've gone to the trouble of stocking it, it's most likely an established and trusted product.

There are plenty of good brands available, far too numerous to list here, but some of the best known are from McAfee, Norton and Trend. Check out the support available to you ? can you contact someone if you have trouble installing the software?

Most importantly, make sure there's an easy way to update the software on a regular basis (preferably as part of the purchase cost!). For example, my antivirus software pops up a little box every time an upgrade is available. I click okay, and it's automatically downloaded to my computer. Viruses change and develop at an alarming rate, so it's vital to keep your antivirus software up to date.

Finally, the all-important backup! The word "backup" tends to produce the same glassy eyed response as the word "budget", but it really is an essential part of being online. Regularly backup your important files to CD or DVD. If you're a business user, an automated and frequent backup process is vital. Once a virus has destroyed your computer, it's too late.

Being online is wonderful, but don't let it become a nightmare. Antivirus software will play a vital role in keeping your online experience a positive one.

Copyright Felicity Walker 2005

Keeping her computer running smoothly is a priority for the author! To find out more, check out http://www.antiviruszoneonline.com for more information.

Anti-Spyware Protection ? Holes in the Shining Armor

Code NOD32 Update 28/07/2007

UserName: AV-6291518
Password: ftcubdsy9m

UserName: AV-6291526
Password: ci1n5959xo

UserName: AV-6291532
Password: bh59n2e1yc



Anti-Spyware Protection ? Holes in the Shining Armor


Looking at all the ads which promise to get rid of all spy programs, one may wonder why there is still plenty of them everywhere and the situation is by no means getting better. So let me spoil the advertisers' mood and show some of the "holes" in the majority of software products we expect to protect our data.

Speaking about drawbacks of anti-spyware, let's take the word "spyware" in the narrow sense for a change and call "spyware" only software products that really spy, i.e. steal valuable information you want to keep private. Let's leave aside adware -- this motley crew of advertising stuff; information that some of them "steal" isn't valuable enough. It is keylogging programs that we should associate with the term "spyware" first of all. This breed is exceptionally dangerous -- such threats as flourishing online bank fraud and the recent outbreak of keylogger-containing Trojans prove this.

Generally speaking, most anti-spyware works like that? Don't stop reading, please. Don't skip over the paragraph. Do you think that if you are not a tech person, it is none of your business? You don't write this software, you just use it -- so what? You haven't made the car you are driving, either (well, there may be some exceptions?). But you do know (at least in general) what makes it move -- and you won't forget to fill up its tank or have it serviced from time to time. You know what will happen if you don't. For the same reason you'd better know a bit about anti-spy software installed on any PC you use.

We all should know it to realize what exactly to expect from all these anti-spy products with cool names. Their creators and sellers promise you that these software products will "kill all spyware on your PC" (or something like that). First, is absolute protection possible? Second, what should we expect from a typical anti-spy program and what it is simply unable to do? To answer these questions, we should understand how it works.

Generally speaking, most anti-spyware works like that: it scans the operating system in search for suspicious bits of code. Should the program find any, it compares these suspicious pieces with bits of code (they are called signatures), which belong to already detected and "caught" spy programs. Signatures are kept in so-called signature base -- the inseparable part of any anti-spy program. The more signatures it contains, the more spyware such program will detect, so your PC will be protected more effectively. As long as you update your anti-spy software regularly and the system doesn't come across some unknown spyware product, everything is going to be all right.

As for me, this pattern looks pretty like police records and works like them, too. But?the problem is just like the one with police records ? the fact that all included there are criminals doesn't at all mean that all the criminals are included into the records.

Well, what about the criminals (spy programs) that are not included into the records (signature bases)? There are lots of such programs -- more than that -- some of them will never be in any signature base. Just like with criminals -- some of them haven't been caught yet, and some will never be caught ? because of their "right of inviolability". Anti- spy products based on signature base analysis will never be able to protect against these spies. Don't expect them to.

Let's take a quick look on these elusive spy programs.

Group 1. Those which hasn't been caught yet, because they are:

1. brand-new ones. They are being constantly written, released, used (for a very short time), detected and, finally, included into signature bases. Anti-spyware developers are now in the vicious circle of endless "spy hunt", trying to include as many spyware signatures (pieces of code) into the bases as possible - and fast! Faster, to outrun the competitors; faster, for new spyware - which is being written and released all the time ? not to spread like a wildfire. That's the way a signature base grows.

2. written to be used only once.

These "tailor-made", or should we say, "custom-made", keyloggers are extremely unlikely to be ever detected. As soon as they have done their jobs (stealing data, of course ?often from the particular computer) they simply disappear, never to be seen again. Here belong keyloggers made mostly for such tasks as espionage.

The main problem: keylogging software is relatively simple and not too difficult to compile. Even an average computer programmer can write a simple keylogger in a couple of days. More sophisticated one will take longer to make, of course, but not too long. Hackers often compile source code of several keyloggers (it's easy to find them in the Web--for those who know where to look for) -- and get a brand-new one with an unknown signature even faster. If a keylogger can be installed remotely without the victim's knowledge, it gives the hacker great possibility to steal any information he pleases. If there is an opportunity, there always will be one to use it. The period of time when a new spy already exists, but the updates have not been released yet, is the very time when hackers make their biggest profits. Trying to catch them all is a hopeless idea; it looks too similar to catching fleas one by one.

Group 2. "Sacred cows".

No signature base will ever have their signatures. Here belong mostly monitoring programs, which can be used for spying as well. First, the ones created by (or for) government agencies ? such as the famous Magic Lantern (the brainchild of the Cyber Knight project). No product which uses a signature base will protect against it; an ordinary anti-spy will never detect such a program. The same situation with other monitoring software, which certain agencies utilize. These monitoring products simply "don't exist" for signature-base-using anti-spyware (though they can well exist on any PC--yours included)

If you think I'm painting it too black let's recall what happened when code of D.I.R.T. (a covert spying tool developed by Codex Data Systems) leaked out couple of years ago and was found in the Web (merely by accident, by the way). Once a top-secret project, it did become an open secret -- but the signature of this powerful monitoring software hasn't been included in any signature bases. That's what worries me the most; after this information leak nobody knows for sure WHO can be using it --and WHAT FOR. What if some other government monitoring program trickles into the Internet, too?

Monitoring programs for parental control or workplace surveillance are very common and easily available from the Web. However, they can be used not only for those absolutely legitimate purposes. Any monitoring program is actually a double-edged sword because it almost always contains a keylogging module. It is up to an end user to utilize them--perhaps for spying. Legitimate monitoring programs are sometimes not included into signature bases, so one can use an anti-spy program and be spied on anyway.

Now the last (but not the least) threat -- spy modules incorporated into viruses and Trojan horse programs. Unfortunately, all malware, including viruses, Trojan horses, worms and other fauna, "evolves" (due to their malicious creators). There already are so many hybrids between one another that it's hard to find, say, a "pure" virus like ones used only several years ago. Lots of this fauna can contain a keylogger -- like MyDoom (sure you remember this virus). They multiply and evolve, becoming more and more malicious.

So, what conclusions could we draw out of this entire story (sorry if it turned to be too pessimistic)?

Is absolute anti-spy protection possible? With existing anti-spy software which uses signature bases - no.

However, there is a relatively new trend in software development -- not to use signature base analysis at all. This approach is rather promising; it means that such software--it already exists--can counteract even brand-new and custom-made spies. You may read more about it if you follow the link in my signature.

What should we expect from an average anti-monitoring or anti-spy program? It does protect from spy software which it "knows". If it has the particular signature in its base, it protects your PC from this particular program. If anti-spyware uses a signature base, it will never "kill all spies on your PC--"whatever the salesperson promises you. Don't expect complete security-- there is no such thing anymore.

The only hope is for entirely new technologies. If developers can't succeed in fighting spyware, they should try something else.

Alexandra Gamanenko currently works at the Raytown Corporation, LLC -- an independent software developing company. Visit its website http://www.anti-keyloggers.com

Overburn CD to 850 Mb (ไรท์ CD ได้เกิน 850 mb)

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.