Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Risk

2/14/2008
08:55 PM
George V. Hulme
George V. Hulme
Commentary
50%
50%

A (Potentially) Bad Idea Is Resurrected At Microsoft

The software maker is researching ways to use worms as a software patch distribution mechanism. Not on any of my machines.

The software maker is researching ways to use worms as a software patch distribution mechanism. Not on any of my machines.In an article that appeared in NewScientist, Microsoft researchers are looking for ways to leverage, and in some ways improve, the self propagation mechanisms of network worms to deploy software patches.

From the NewScientist story:

Because no central server needs to provide and coordinate all the downloads, software patches that spread like worms could be faster and easier to distribute because no central server must bear all the load. "These strategies can minimise the amount of global traffic across the network,"

I'm sure it would work. Except for those times that it doesn't.

Maybe on subnets of corporate networks where each system image is the same, this might be a safe way to deploy patches after they've been tested.

But what happens if a visitor's notebook is patched by this "friendly" worm -- and the patch crashes this visitor's system and results in significant data loss? Who is responsible for that mess? (Hey, I just wanted to check my e-mail!)

And this would be a really bad idea if ISPs decided to start dropping worms that would infect and then patch their subscribers. I want the ability to establish a restore point on my Windows images before I patch. And I like running a SuperDuper! backup on both my MacBook Pro and Mac Pro before I patch Leopard. That way, if something bad happens during -- or because of -- the update I can always make my world good again.

For those security pros that have been around awhile, they'll recognize that this "friendly" worm idea isn't new. In fact, there was a lot of talk about "Code Green" type worms to patch systems vulnerable to Code Red infections back in the very "wormy" summer and fall of 2001.

And in the 1970s, a virus known as Creeper struck the Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (the precursor to what is now the Internet). It displayed something to the effect of "Catch me if you can" as it spread.

Someone tried exactly that, with a program dubbed Reaper. To the best of my understanding, the Reaper did hunt down and kill Creeper without any negative impact. But it was a simpler tech world back then. Today, no CISO would ever want an application they couldn't control hopping around their subnets sniffing for things to patch.

I think the risks aren't worth the reward. And that these friendly worms could just as easily be rigged to inflict harm. And then there's the Law of Unintended Consequences that one of these worms won't quite work as planned. So what do you think? Would it be a good idea if someone wrote a worm named "Clear Skies" to go out and hunt down Storm botnets?

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 10/13/2020
Where Are the 'Great Exits' in the Data Security Market?
Dave Cole, Cofounder and CEO, Open Raven,  10/13/2020
Overcoming the Challenge of Shorter Certificate Lifespans
Mike Cooper, Founder & CEO of Revocent,  10/15/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
The COVID-19 pandemic turned the world -- and enterprise computing -- on end. Here's a look at how cybersecurity teams are retrenching their defense strategies, rebuilding their teams, and selecting new technologies to stop the oncoming rise of online attacks.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-15256
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-19
A prototype pollution vulnerability has been found in `object-path` <= 0.11.4 affecting the `set()` method. The vulnerability is limited to the `includeInheritedProps` mode (if version >= 0.11.0 is used), which has to be explicitly enabled by creating a new instance of `object-path` and settin...
CVE-2020-15261
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-19
On Windows the Veyon Service before version 4.4.2 contains an unquoted service path vulnerability, allowing locally authenticated users with administrative privileges to run malicious executables with LocalSystem privileges. Since Veyon users (both students and teachers) usually don't have administr...
CVE-2020-6084
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-19
An exploitable denial of service vulnerability exists in the ENIP Request Path Logical Segment functionality of Allen-Bradley Flex IO 1794-AENT/B 4.003. A specially crafted network request can cause a loss of communications with the device resulting in denial-of-service. An attacker can send a malic...
CVE-2020-6085
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-19
An exploitable denial of service vulnerability exists in the ENIP Request Path Logical Segment functionality of Allen-Bradley Flex IO 1794-AENT/B 4.003. A specially crafted network request can cause a loss of communications with the device resulting in denial-of-service. An attacker can send a malic...
CVE-2020-10746
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-19
A flaw was found in Infinispan version 10, where it permits local access to controls via both REST and HotRod APIs. This flaw allows a user authenticated to the local machine to perform all operations on the caches, including the creation, update, deletion, and shutdown of the entire server.