The Official Internet/Computer Security News Discussion Thread
#201
Needs more Lemon Pledge
Anyone know where to plug in DNS sever addresses in DD-Wrt?
#202
Sanest Florida Man
Thread Starter
Setup > basic setup
#203
Senior Moderator
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Better Neighborhood, Arizona
Posts: 45,641
Received 2,329 Likes
on
1,309 Posts
#204
Needs more Lemon Pledge
Awesome, thanks Ken.
#205
Needs more Lemon Pledge
All fixed. Everything seems to be working well.
#206
Senior Moderator
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Better Neighborhood, Arizona
Posts: 45,641
Received 2,329 Likes
on
1,309 Posts
Suite.. glad I could help.
#207
Needs more Lemon Pledge
Thanks!
It's funny, I overcomplicated it. I was digging DEEP into all the menus on the dd-wrt and forgot to look at the basic page of setting...
It's funny, I overcomplicated it. I was digging DEEP into all the menus on the dd-wrt and forgot to look at the basic page of setting...
#208
Needs more Lemon Pledge
Grrrrr....
Anyone have any ides how to troubleshoot AZine only page load issues?
All other pages load fine, but any Azine page takes forever. According to the browser status bar, I hang at "waiting for Acurazine.com". Command line pings for www.acurazine.com are normal (~33ms).
Occurs in FF4 and Chrome and ONLY on this page. I run Adblock and Facebook block.
I have cleared temp and cookies (CCLeaner).
Anyone have any ides how to troubleshoot AZine only page load issues?
All other pages load fine, but any Azine page takes forever. According to the browser status bar, I hang at "waiting for Acurazine.com". Command line pings for www.acurazine.com are normal (~33ms).
Occurs in FF4 and Chrome and ONLY on this page. I run Adblock and Facebook block.
I have cleared temp and cookies (CCLeaner).
#209
Needs more Lemon Pledge
Grrrrr....
Anyone have any ides how to troubleshoot AZine only page load issues?
All other pages load fine, but any Azine page takes forever. According to the browser status bar, I hang at "waiting for Acurazine.com". Command line pings for www.acurazine.com are normal (~33ms).
Occurs in FF4 and Chrome and ONLY on this page. I run Adblock and Facebook block.
I have cleared temp and cookies (CCLeaner).
Anyone have any ides how to troubleshoot AZine only page load issues?
All other pages load fine, but any Azine page takes forever. According to the browser status bar, I hang at "waiting for Acurazine.com". Command line pings for www.acurazine.com are normal (~33ms).
Occurs in FF4 and Chrome and ONLY on this page. I run Adblock and Facebook block.
I have cleared temp and cookies (CCLeaner).
#210
Needs more Lemon Pledge
Even posting takes forever. When I click "post quick reply" it takes about 30-45 seconds before I see the posting. Again I get "waiting for Acurazine.com".
#211
Sanest Florida Man
Thread Starter
It's not just you, same thing is happening to me. I'm sure they know about it....
#212
The sizzle in the Steak
...and I think it's now fixed.
#214
Sanest Florida Man
Thread Starter
Loading ok on my iPad now
#215
Needs more Lemon Pledge
Seems to be resolved now.
Thanks AZine crew!
Thanks AZine crew!
#216
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,276
Received 2,793 Likes
on
1,988 Posts
mustve been an issue for you cause i saw you had tons of double posts..
#217
Sanest Florida Man
Thread Starter
Microsoft has released Microsoft Safety Scanner, a no-install anti-malware program designed for one-off malware scans and removal.
you can get it here
http://www.microsoft.com/security/sc...s/default.aspx
#218
Sanest Florida Man
Thread Starter
I'm running it now, it looks like MSRT but it has the MSE definitions instead. Very handy!
#219
Drifting
iTrader: (1)
So it's like a hybrid of the monthly MSRT but with MSE definitions. MSRT only scans for limited threats while this is a 70MB download and scans for much more. It seems like a disposable version of MSE, it expires after 10 days and you have to redownload to get the latest version.
you can get it here
http://www.microsoft.com/security/sc...s/default.aspx
you can get it here
http://www.microsoft.com/security/sc...s/default.aspx
#220
この道は毛むくじゃらのマンコだらけ..
Hey guys my computer's been acting up since I updated the latest security for windows 7.... When I close the computer and put the computer to sleep and open the lid to wake up the computer, my wireless internet connection disappears and I can't reconnect unless I start up my computer again. When I go to turn off the computer sometimes it doesn't even shut down so I have to force shut down. After I reboot the connection comes back... Computer is a Dell Inspiron E1705, 32bit, Gforce Go 7900GS 2.0gb ram, Core2 T5300@ 1.73ghz. Here's the code that I got:
Problem signature:
Problem Event Name: BlueScreen
OS Version: 6.1.7601.2.1.0.256.48
Locale ID: 1033
Additional information about the problem:
BCCode: 9f
BCP1: 00000003
BCP2: 84E9CB90
BCP3: 82D72AE0
BCP4: 84F3CDC8
OS Version: 6_1_7601
Service Pack: 1_0
Product: 256_1
Any idea what the heck's going on? Thinking about doing a system restore to before the 14th when stuff started going downhill.... but that's a last resort.
Problem signature:
Problem Event Name: BlueScreen
OS Version: 6.1.7601.2.1.0.256.48
Locale ID: 1033
Additional information about the problem:
BCCode: 9f
BCP1: 00000003
BCP2: 84E9CB90
BCP3: 82D72AE0
BCP4: 84F3CDC8
OS Version: 6_1_7601
Service Pack: 1_0
Product: 256_1
Any idea what the heck's going on? Thinking about doing a system restore to before the 14th when stuff started going downhill.... but that's a last resort.
#221
Sanest Florida Man
Thread Starter
#222
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,276
Received 2,793 Likes
on
1,988 Posts
#226
Team Owner
How to avoid or remove Mac Defender malware
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4650
On the plus side I will say that it is nice that all you need to do is terminate the processes and drop the folder in the trash.
#227
Sanest Florida Man
Thread Starter
^My first virus removal case on supporspace (Whisker's thing) was a MacDefender! That thing is blowing up! Apple say's they'll be releasing an update to OS X that removes MacDefender and prevents it from being installed.
I'll quote my gizmodo post here
I'll quote my gizmodo post here
Originally Posted by #1 STUNNA
So they'll stop this variant of malware attack. All the author's will have to do is rename the program or change it slightly so that it is a different MD5 sum (not sure exactly how Apple identifies this program) and then they'll be in the clear.
The huge success of MacDefender I think will be the beginning of a wave of malware on OS X. MacDefender has been the most successful by far of all OS X malware and I guarantee you it has caught the interest of other malware developers.
FYI I have a remote support job where I fix people's PCs and Macs from all over the county and that includes removing viruses and at my job we went from seeing zero Mac malware cases to seeing about 15% (my guestimation) of our malware cases being MacDefender. It's been very successful and Apple has just started on it's 2nd cat and mouse game (1st being the iOS jailbreakers).
Fortunately this macdefender malware is extremely easy to remove, it's stored in the apps folder and all you have to do is cancel the process and then delete the packaged app and remove the login items entry. that's it. I'd expect OS X malware to get more difficult to remove in the future......
What has been rumored for years has finally come to pass.....
The huge success of MacDefender I think will be the beginning of a wave of malware on OS X. MacDefender has been the most successful by far of all OS X malware and I guarantee you it has caught the interest of other malware developers.
FYI I have a remote support job where I fix people's PCs and Macs from all over the county and that includes removing viruses and at my job we went from seeing zero Mac malware cases to seeing about 15% (my guestimation) of our malware cases being MacDefender. It's been very successful and Apple has just started on it's 2nd cat and mouse game (1st being the iOS jailbreakers).
Fortunately this macdefender malware is extremely easy to remove, it's stored in the apps folder and all you have to do is cancel the process and then delete the packaged app and remove the login items entry. that's it. I'd expect OS X malware to get more difficult to remove in the future......
What has been rumored for years has finally come to pass.....
#228
Team Owner
I won't be impressed until something appears that silently installs itself.
#229
Sanest Florida Man
Thread Starter
you don't even need that though. look how successful macdefender has been. Some OS X users are stupid enough to enter a password at every prompt they get. macdefender doesn't use many malware like tactics to get the job done. I does a driveby download and then prompts for password and then actually installs itself in the apps folder. I don't think I've seen malware on Windows put itself in programs folder. Nowadays it hides itself in the appdata\local\temp folder or something hidden and says it's a system file so it's even more hidden. If they made a good rootkit for OS X, that shit would be unstoppable, there probably aren't any good tools to stop it.
I really wonder how good these mac anti-virus programs are at removing and detecting malware. How many guys do the have working on signatures? Probably one guy that works at home by checking the Apple forums for people complaining about malware in the thread so then he might look into it.
I wonder what the success rate of malware compared to windows? Yeah OS X is a smaller target but once infected are Mac users more likely to hand over CC info than Windows users or vis versa? Or is it the same?
I really wonder how good these mac anti-virus programs are at removing and detecting malware. How many guys do the have working on signatures? Probably one guy that works at home by checking the Apple forums for people complaining about malware in the thread so then he might look into it.
I wonder what the success rate of malware compared to windows? Yeah OS X is a smaller target but once infected are Mac users more likely to hand over CC info than Windows users or vis versa? Or is it the same?
#230
Sanest Florida Man
Thread Starter
another problem with OS X is that when apple does eventually release this update that blocks this variant of MacDefender it will take a while for everyone to get it since OS X doesn't install updates automatically like Windows does. If you leave it up to your users to install important updates then it will almost never happen unless they're tech saavy. My mom never installs updates on her Mac and most people one Windows ignore those Adobe and Java updater programs that run at startup. Hence why they're so popular ways of spreading malware.
It's almost 100% of the time that I sit down and log in at another person's PC the first things I see are Java and flash updates waiting to be installed cause the user always clicks remind me later......
It's almost 100% of the time that I sit down and log in at another person's PC the first things I see are Java and flash updates waiting to be installed cause the user always clicks remind me later......
#231
Team Owner
New 'MACDefender' Variant Installs Without Admin Password Requirement
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/25/...d-requirement/
Unlike the previous variants of this fake antivirus, no administrator's password is required to install this program. Since any user with an administrator's account - the default if there is just one user on a Mac - can install software in the Applications folder, a password is not needed. This package installs an application - the downloader - named avRunner, which then launches automatically. At the same time, the installation package deletes itself from the user's Mac, so no traces of the original installer are left behind.
#232
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,276
Received 2,793 Likes
on
1,988 Posts
Yea just read that.
#233
Sanest Florida Man
Thread Starter
So now malware hackers have a successful exploit that downloads and installs silently on OS X. It should have a near 100% install success rate since Macs don't need AntiVirus software so there's nothing to stop it.
It's all downhill from here.....
Apple better respond fast and get their shit together but they won't. They need to turn on the firewall disable autolaunching of "safe" downloads and set the default OS X Software updater to install updates automatically and check for updates everyday.
This is shit Microsoft learned to do years ago back before XP SP2, you'd think Apple would learn from others mistakes but apparently they're head is too far up their asses.
Why does it even put it in the apps folder? What happens when you try to run an app not stored in the apps folder? Soon they'll be putting these programs in the ._Hidden Folders and doing other things to make it's removal harder.
Is there something on OS X similar to group policy on Windows? Is there some way in OS X to disable Activity Monitor?
It's all downhill from here.....
Apple better respond fast and get their shit together but they won't. They need to turn on the firewall disable autolaunching of "safe" downloads and set the default OS X Software updater to install updates automatically and check for updates everyday.
This is shit Microsoft learned to do years ago back before XP SP2, you'd think Apple would learn from others mistakes but apparently they're head is too far up their asses.
Why does it even put it in the apps folder? What happens when you try to run an app not stored in the apps folder? Soon they'll be putting these programs in the ._Hidden Folders and doing other things to make it's removal harder.
Is there something on OS X similar to group policy on Windows? Is there some way in OS X to disable Activity Monitor?
Last edited by #1 STUNNA; 05-25-2011 at 02:58 PM.
#234
Needs more Lemon Pledge
#235
Sanest Florida Man
Thread Starter
OS X and Safari needs the Smart Screen Application Reputation feature that IE9 has and that will be in Windows 8.....
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2...on-in-ie9.aspx
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2...on-in-ie9.aspx
#236
Sanest Florida Man
Thread Starter
#237
Team Owner
Even with all that fancy stuff that Windows 7 has...
Windows 7's malware infection rate climbs, XP's falls
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...mbs_XP_s_falls
OS X has been around for 10 years and finally there is a sneaky piece of malware for it. But yet somehow Apple has their heads up their ass? Take a chill pill and let's see how Apple addresses it.
Windows 7's malware infection rate climbs, XP's falls
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...mbs_XP_s_falls
Data released today by Microsoft showed that Windows 7's malware infection rate climbed by more than 30% during the second half of 2010, even as the infection rate of the 10-year-old Windows XP fell by more than 20%.
"Infection rates have jumped [for Windows 7]," admitted Jeff Williams, the principal group program manager with the Microsoft Malware Protection Center (MMPC). "We attribute that to the increased presence of malicious software attacks out there."
For the second half of 2010, 32-bit Windows 7 machines were infected at an average rate of over 4 PCs per 1,000, a 33% increase over the approximately 3-per-1,000 infection rate during the first half of the year.
PCs running the 64-bit version of Windows 7 fared slightly better, with an infection rate of 2.5 per 1,000 during all of 2010.
"Infection rates have jumped [for Windows 7]," admitted Jeff Williams, the principal group program manager with the Microsoft Malware Protection Center (MMPC). "We attribute that to the increased presence of malicious software attacks out there."
For the second half of 2010, 32-bit Windows 7 machines were infected at an average rate of over 4 PCs per 1,000, a 33% increase over the approximately 3-per-1,000 infection rate during the first half of the year.
PCs running the 64-bit version of Windows 7 fared slightly better, with an infection rate of 2.5 per 1,000 during all of 2010.
#238
Sanest Florida Man
Thread Starter
Even with all that fancy stuff that Windows 7 has...
Windows 7's malware infection rate climbs, XP's falls
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...mbs_XP_s_falls
OS X has been around for 10 years and finally there is a sneaky piece of malware for it. But yet somehow Apple has their heads up their ass? Take a chill pill and let's see how Apple addresses it.
Windows 7's malware infection rate climbs, XP's falls
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...mbs_XP_s_falls
OS X has been around for 10 years and finally there is a sneaky piece of malware for it. But yet somehow Apple has their heads up their ass? Take a chill pill and let's see how Apple addresses it.
You could take the same article and display it another way showing the overall improvement of Windows 7 compared to Windows XP, instead of some clickbait headline. Windows 7 malware infection rate is significantly lower than Windows XP.
oV5CW.jpg
7pfIK.jpg
So you're about 500% more likely to get malware on the old version of Windows comared to the latest version. I'd say that's good proof of MS learning from their mistakes and taking security very seriously and implementing all sorts of features that either aren't implemented as well on OS X (ASLR) or have no equal on Mac.
MS has been moving constantly to improve security while Apple has done the bare minimum. Yeah OS X is more secure than XP but technically it's not more secure than Windows 7. It may be safer but that's only cause no one targets the Mac. If this is the point where that malware becomes much more popular on the mac than that won't be case anymore and Apple's lackadaisical approach to security features while claiming to be immune to PC viruses is going to come back and bite them.
http://www.winrumors.com/windows-7-m...an-windows-xp/
It seems to me that Windows 7 infection rate has stayed relatively the same since it's release, nice try though.....
Last edited by #1 STUNNA; 05-25-2011 at 06:51 PM.
#239
Team Owner
No doubt Win 7 is better than Win XP, but to blow off a 30% increase in infection rate in just a 6 month span is laughable. I wonder what that infection rate would be if they excluded enterprise workstations and just targeted the home users. I just about fell out of my chair when you claimed that Win 7 is more secure than a *nix. Thanks for the laugh.
The argument that virus writers don't target mac is also a weak one. I think there would be quite the rush for some geek to go over to /b and tell the world how he conquered OS X.
The argument that virus writers don't target mac is also a weak one. I think there would be quite the rush for some geek to go over to /b and tell the world how he conquered OS X.
#240
Sanest Florida Man
Thread Starter
How is that laughable? Look how low the success numbers are compared to the other OSes and look how flat the line is. It's just variances in attacks going on at that time just like the article you quoted claimed. The graph starts at 4 and ends at 4, there's some fluctuation in between big deal.
I think it's pretty much common knowledge amongst Security Experts that Windows is more secure than OS X from a technical standpoint. You know Charlie Miller? The guy wins a Mac or iPhone at the Pwn2Own contest every year. Ask him which he thinks is more secure?
So one of the most respected Security Experts in the world agrees with me that when it comes to security Apple isn't doing enough and that Windows is more secure than Mac and you're the one laughing........
So a little hacker can hack OS X easily and try to get props from /b/ but if it has low ROI then that doesn't pay his bills and that's more important.
http://news.techworld.com/security/3...s-says-hacker/
I think it's pretty much common knowledge amongst Security Experts that Windows is more secure than OS X from a technical standpoint. You know Charlie Miller? The guy wins a Mac or iPhone at the Pwn2Own contest every year. Ask him which he thinks is more secure?
Snow Leopard lacks security features that are built in to Windows XP, Windows Vista and Windows 7, a noted Mac researcher has said.
Dubbed ASLR, for address space layout randomisation, the technology randomly assigns data to memory to make it tougher for attackers to determine the location of critical operating system functions, and thus make it harder for them to craft reliable exploits.
"Apple didn't change anything," said Charlie Miller, of Baltimore-based Independent Security Evaluators, the co-author of The Mac Hacker's Handbook, and winner of two consecutive "Pwn2own" hacker contests. "It's the exact same ASLR as in Leopard, which means it's not very good."
Two years ago, Miller and other researchers criticised Apple for releasing Mac OS X 10.5, aka Leopard, with half-baked ASLR that failed to randomise important components of the OS, including the heap, the stack and the dynamic linker, the part of Leopard that links multiple shared libraries for an executable.
Miller was disappointed that Apple didn't improve ASLR from Leopard to Snow Leopard. "I hoped Snow Leopard would do full ASLR, but it doesn't," said Miller. "I don't understand why they didn't. But Apple missed an opportunity with Snow Leopard."
Because Snow Leopard lacks fully-functional ASLR, Macs are still easier to compromise than Windows Vista systems, Miller said. "Snow Leopard's more secure than Leopard, but it's not as secure as Vista or Windows 7," he said. "When Apple has both [in place], that's when I'll stop complaining about Apple's security."
In the end, though, hacker disinterest in Mac OS X has more to do with numbers, as in market share, than in what protective measure Apple adds to the OS. "It's harder to write exploits for Windows than the Mac," Miller said, "but all you see are Windows exploits. That's because if [the hacker] can hit 90% of the machines out there, that's all he's gonna do. It's not worth him nearly doubling his work just to get that last 10%."
Dubbed ASLR, for address space layout randomisation, the technology randomly assigns data to memory to make it tougher for attackers to determine the location of critical operating system functions, and thus make it harder for them to craft reliable exploits.
"Apple didn't change anything," said Charlie Miller, of Baltimore-based Independent Security Evaluators, the co-author of The Mac Hacker's Handbook, and winner of two consecutive "Pwn2own" hacker contests. "It's the exact same ASLR as in Leopard, which means it's not very good."
Two years ago, Miller and other researchers criticised Apple for releasing Mac OS X 10.5, aka Leopard, with half-baked ASLR that failed to randomise important components of the OS, including the heap, the stack and the dynamic linker, the part of Leopard that links multiple shared libraries for an executable.
Miller was disappointed that Apple didn't improve ASLR from Leopard to Snow Leopard. "I hoped Snow Leopard would do full ASLR, but it doesn't," said Miller. "I don't understand why they didn't. But Apple missed an opportunity with Snow Leopard."
Because Snow Leopard lacks fully-functional ASLR, Macs are still easier to compromise than Windows Vista systems, Miller said. "Snow Leopard's more secure than Leopard, but it's not as secure as Vista or Windows 7," he said. "When Apple has both [in place], that's when I'll stop complaining about Apple's security."
In the end, though, hacker disinterest in Mac OS X has more to do with numbers, as in market share, than in what protective measure Apple adds to the OS. "It's harder to write exploits for Windows than the Mac," Miller said, "but all you see are Windows exploits. That's because if [the hacker] can hit 90% of the machines out there, that's all he's gonna do. It's not worth him nearly doubling his work just to get that last 10%."
So a little hacker can hack OS X easily and try to get props from /b/ but if it has low ROI then that doesn't pay his bills and that's more important.
http://news.techworld.com/security/3...s-says-hacker/
Last edited by #1 STUNNA; 05-25-2011 at 07:27 PM.