RE: [Full-Disclosure] rpc worm

[Jordan Wiens <jwiens@nersp.nerdc.ufl.edu>]

Thank goodness it's based on that since it means that existing symantec
and mcafee sigs will pick it up, making it easier to help end-users here
deal with it.

Hopefully people will now shut up about firewalling netbios at the
internet now.  We did, and it looks like it only delayed infection
internally until about 3pm EST, as opposed to maybe 1pm EST which looks
like the earliest we started seeing an increase in external scanning.

-- 
Jordan Wiens, CISSP
UF Network Incident Response Team
(352)392-2061

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Jason Coombs wrote:

> It appears that the exploit and bindshell portion of the msblast worm is
> vanilla, off-the-shelf "oc192-dcom.c"
>
> The only novel code is likely the scripted commands sent to the remote shell
> via port 4444
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: full-disclosure-admin@lists.netsys.com
> [mailto:full-disclosure-admin@lists.netsys.com]On Behalf Of Jordan Wiens
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 10:23 AM
> To: full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com
> Subject: [Full-Disclosure] rpc worm
>
>
> We're seeing what looks like an rpc worm spreading internally (gotta love
> dialup users), and I'm trying to figure out if this is something new, or
> just something old that we finally are getting.
>
> I'm not entirely sure it's a worm, it almost appears to be an auto-rooter
> with quick spreading ability (fine line between that and a worm, I
> suppose).  Has anybody else seen something with these characteristics:
>
> Host scans local subnet first, looking for vulnerable machines and opening
> up port 4444 on the remote host, and running the following:
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html