| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Server attacks stump Microsoft | |
|
||
| Time: 02:49 EST/07:49 GMT | News Source: News.com | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Microsoft released further details of a rash of attacks on Windows 2000 servers that has so far stumped the software giant's research team. In an advisory posted Aug. 30, Microsoft warned customers that several companies had recently observed an "increased level of hacking activity." Microsoft Product Support Services (PSS) told system administrators to be on the lookout for Trojan horses--programs that appear to be legitimate but aren't--and for several specific kinds of odd network behavior. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 156 Last | Next |
The time now is
1:58:10 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 9/5/2002 2:08:47 PM |
| No comments, huh? No one willing to stand up and defend MS on this one? Or is it just that it's as much a mystery to us as Microsoft? Well, this sure is a lovely one in my mind. Microsoft is telling users crap, they admit they don't know crap, don't know if they'll figure out what's what, don't know how to fix the problem... meanwhile rogue not-a-worm worms are spreading amongst Win2K servers. Lovely. |
| #2 By 6859 (204.71.100.215) at 9/5/2002 2:53:28 PM |
| Patience, my dear boy, patience. As with all things, discovery takes time. It will be figured out, hopefully not before it's too late. |
| #3 By 116 (66.69.198.173) at 9/5/2002 3:24:19 PM |
|
This is troubling. However as their is little or no information available there isn't much to say. If its because of some previously disclosed vuln that is being exploited then that isn't MS fault. Get on your machines and get them patched!
If its something new then that is scary. Time will tell. This article was just sent out to the University security list. I don't know if its real or not but for you conspiracy theorists out there it could be a malicious lie spread by Linux Zealots... |
| #4 By 116 (66.69.198.173) at 9/5/2002 3:24:21 PM |
|
dp This post was edited by RedAvenger on Thursday, September 05, 2002 at 17:30. |
| #5 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 9/5/2002 4:16:27 PM |
|
Red, personally, I think there's plenty to say. Like:
Why the hell can't MS figure out if the SPs fixed the problem and that this is only affecting non-patched Win2000 servers? Can't they test an unpatched box and a patched one? Can't they tell whether or not all of the infections so far (which they admit is "substantial") are unpatched? Why can't they tell if the IP list is a list of attacked boxes, to be attacked boxes, or something irrelevent? Do they really think they can get away with saying its not a worm because the file which transfers files doesn't transfer just itself, instead it transfers a group of files that does the infecting? etc... This post was edited by sodajerk on Thursday, September 05, 2002 at 16:17. |
| #6 By 116 (66.69.198.173) at 9/5/2002 5:29:37 PM |
| I don't know sodajerk? It takes time to answer those questions and they obviously talked to someone that has no clue whats going on. I am confident they will get it figured out. Those lads and lassies over at MS are a very bright bunch. Just give em some time. |
| #7 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 9/5/2002 6:28:31 PM |
|
I guess I'm not sure what you are expecting for a response jerky boy.
I checked all the security lists I'm aware of and I can find almost no discussion on this issue. It doesn't appear to be widespread so nobody has tried to study it. One cannot determine the attack vector without seeing the attack in action. The symptoms discussed in the KB article suggest if it is a worm it spreads through easy vectors by trying to attach to machines on the local network hoping the user is an admin. Also sounds like the article is making a mountain out of a mole hill. |
| #8 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 9/5/2002 7:12:34 PM |
|
Jeez, soda, I read three stories YESTERDAY in the mainstream press. I think my questions are pretty basic--it's not like anyone ever rolls up their sleeves here and discusses the nitty gritty of an exploit and how to repair it here... but seriously, why the hell can't MS say whether or not it only affects unpatched systems or not? They say it has affected a substantial number of servers already; are any of them unpatched? There's your answer. Obviously they are either so screwed up they don't know what to do or this is so serious that they are acting as if some of these answers can't possibly be answered...
I don't need answers to questions nobody can answer, but that doesn't mean that we can't have a discussion about how MS cannot be trusted or respected with regards to security. Clearly, there's a lot that could be understood if they were clear about their details, provided details, and cooperated. Instead they know this is so bad, they are talking about it... but they are leaving people confused, pissed, and without answers without providing any or any semblance there of. In other words, they suck when it comes to dealing with their poor security. |
| #9 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 9/5/2002 7:25:39 PM |
|
How's this for further discussion: What the hell did they do during that security audit? Over the past month vulnerabilities have come out like clockwork, same as always, if not faster... and more sever, apparently much more severe.
If we're supposed to take them seriously, at what point are we allowed to expect to see some results? |
| #10 By 116 (66.69.198.173) at 9/5/2002 8:12:09 PM |
|
I wouldn't judge current products on this. The real story begins with .Net Server 2003 and Windows XP SP2.
Then you can make your judgement. |
| #11 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 9/5/2002 8:37:47 PM |
| Right, okay, so can we at least say that the audits were all about puffery and PR, and they actually didn't find a damn thing? |
| #12 By 116 (66.69.198.173) at 9/5/2002 8:59:30 PM |
| LOL. Definitely PR I agree no doubt. However they did actually get everyone trained up and its a priority for all the programmers going forward. Its going to be a gradual process. A process I am glad they are devoting money and resources to. |
| #13 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 9/6/2002 4:28:55 AM |
|
Oh I see... jerky boy doesn't want to have a serious discussion he just wants to bash MS.
same old same old |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 156 Last | Next |
The time now is
1:58:10 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
