Tag Archive | "Review"

Android viral threats review

March 15, 2011

Experts have repeatedly stated that the more popular an operating system is, the more interested virus makers are in it. This assertion can surely be applied to the operating system Android.

Android.SmsSend — little SMS Trojans family

One of the first references to this Trojan in the media was on August 4, 2010. That seems quite recent. However, it is hardly surprising. The mobile market is very dynamic, and virus writers also have to be creative and act quickly.

This was the day a user of the popular Russian forum 4pda.ru/forum, which is devoted to mobile phones, smartphones, and PDAs, added a post describing an issue related to a certain program (a video player) downloaded from the Internet. Privileges defined for this program allowed it to work with SMS, or, more precisely, to send SMS; the permission SEND_SMS was enabled. The next day another forum visitor reported a problem in connection with this file. The file’s name was RU.apk. The file featured a video player icon  with the name: MoviePlayer. Interestingly, the created date for files in the package was July 29, 2010. It turns out that the Trojan distributed undetected for nearly a week.

Forum users sent the suspicious file to anti-virus companies on the 5th of August. It was then that Android.SmsSend.1 was added to the Dr.Web virus database. A bit later the same malicious program was added to the virus databases of other anti-virus vendors.

On September 7, 2010, a small post from Doctor Web describing a new version of Android.SmsSend with a different icon and package name was published in the Android section of http://www.mobile-review.com.

        

The new modification was added to the virus database on the same day, September 7, 2010, under the name Android.SmsSend.2. How and when it detects Android.SmsSend.1, detection of foreign anti-virus products will appear later, which is quite logical, given that the Trojans of the family are aimed at smartphone users in Russia.

No other news about SMS Trojan horses for Androidwas was available for about a month, except heated discussions regarding the already detected versions Their appearance caused a great deal of controversy among both professionals and users. Some people believed that it was impossible to get infected if the basic rules of security were observed—be careful, especially when visiting a suspicious site, and verify the permissions for programs upon their installation. Others objected that carelessness and curiosity were natural human qualities and that no precautions when visiting questionable resources would guarantee full protection against threats.

October 14, 2010, saw media reports about a new version of the SMS-Trojan horse. Its creators returned to the original player icon, and the name of the package distribution was the same: pornoplayer.apk. The corresponding database update for Dr.Web products was released on October 11.

The most interesting trait of the Trojan horse is the technique used to get it to victims’ smartphones. Owners of adult content sites (no information about other site categories is available yet) could add Trojan downloading features on their sites as part of their affiliate programmes. But the trick was that Android.SmsSend would only be downloaded when the site page was loaded by a mobile browser. If a page from such a site is loaded on an Android smartphone, the SMS Trojan horse for Android will be downloaded onto the device without the user’s consent. The user may not notice anything except the rapidly fading system message displayed as the download is started. Later, by accident or out of curiosity, the owner of the smartphone can install the program, and the spicy name or carelessness, in turn, may lure the user into launching it. But If the site is loaded on any other device that doesn’t run Android, the SMS Trojan horse written in J2ME will be downloaded. If a similar site page is opened on a conventional computer, the Trojan horse will not be downloaded, and the browser in most cases will open the desired site or a home page of one of the well-known search engines.

From China with Love

The peculiarity of this group lies mainly in its origin and distribution methods. We are talking about Android.Geinimi, Android.Spy and Android.ADRD (Dr.Web classification). The birthplace of these malicious programs is China. And they became famous in late 2010.

These Trojan horses are distributed under the guise of well-known programs, games, and live wallpaper. The software on this list includes programs popular worldwide, and those known only in China. Most of them are distributed via Chinese forums and websites devoted to mobile technology as well as through file sharing services.

The infection scheme in this case works as follows: A smartphone user downloads and installs such a program, runs it, and apparently it works just as expected—the user can play the game, there are no failures in the program, and the features correspond to the title. However, hidden from the user, the Trojan component is also launched. While you are enjoying the game or taking advantage of the state-of-the-art features of the program, the malicious service running in the background covertly collects your contact information, short messages, device’s IMEI and SIM card data. All this information is sent to the server controlled by the Trojan horse’s writers.

Android.Geinimi can determine the smartphone’s location, download files from the Internet (e.g. other programs), retrieve and modify browser bookmarks and contact information, make calls, and send, process, and edit short messages. Even if the user closes the running program, the Trojan service will continue its work in the background.

In addition to retrieving and modifying contacts and short message information, sending SMS, and positioning, Android.Spycan also set itself to be launched automatically. Its authors are also able to control the Trojan horse remotely via SMS. Android.Spy can also be loaded when the smartphone is turned on, but its purpose is somewhat different—it collects the smartphone’s ID information, specifies certain search parameters in the search engine forms, and opens links. The Trojan horse may download its updates, but installation still requires the participation of the user.

A typical feature of a program containing the Trojan horse is its additional permission requirements. For example, if the game in its original form only needs access to the Internet, an infected version will ask for higher privileges. So, if you definitely know that a particular program or game does not have the features that require access to SMS, calls, contacts, etc., cancelling the installation will be a wise decision.

By now Dr.Web recognizes 26 modifications of Android.Spy, 25 Android.Geinimi modifications, and 12 variations of Android.ADRD.
Android.Youlubg(Dr.Web classification) is a recently discovered malicious program. As usual, virus makers used a known program to which they added malicious features. The main function of Android.Youlubg is gathering personal information and contacting its controlling service. Another possible feature yet unconfirmed is sending SMS at a paid service number. Probably, the feature subscribes a victim to an unwanted service.

“Spy on the sly”

In addition to common Trojans, commercial spyware programs also pose a threat to Android smartphones. Depending on the developer, their features may include tracking the smartphone’s coordinates, eavesdropping, retrieving information from incoming and outgoing SMS, calls, etc. Their expressly stated legitimate purpose is to monitor and protect children, monitor staff members, or verify a spouse’s fidelity.

The best known commercial spyware programs are Flexispy, Mobile Spy and Mobistealth. Most developers of such programs offer their solutions for several mobile platforms: Symbian, Android, Blackberry, Windows Mobile, iPhone, iPad, Maemo (the device’s jailbreak is a prerequisite for iPhone and iPad).

Most of the programs are available on a one-year subscription basis. The price depends on the set of features available with the particular version of the program.

To install such a “bug” on the target device belonging to the person being shadowed, physical access to the device is required since the program must be configured properly before it can be used, and all possible traces of unauthorized activity must be erased.

But how do these spies go undetected in the system?

In the case of Android, most spyware programs do not have icons on the desktop. And if they do, such icons have neutral names. If the program is launched by clicking on the icon, a special module, designed to remove all suspicion, is activated. This may be a simple game, calculator, etc. If the user checks the list of installed programs in the system menu, the spy, in most cases, will bear a neutral name or a name similar to the name of a system module.

Some commercial and free spyware programs are available in Android Market. Others can be downloaded from developers’ sites directly onto the target smartphone or copied to a memory card. All these spyware programs can be used for legal and illegal purposes.

The threat from the rear

In early March 2011, the media reported that programs and games encompassing Trojan horse features were found in Android Market. Someone has added Trojan horse routines into popular software. The total number of compromised applications is almost 50.

Android.DreamExploid, the cause of this infection, can collect information about the compromised device including its IMEI, phone number, and Internet connection configuration used to contact the intruders, but most importantly, the Trojan horse installs an exploit that elevates the privileges of the smartphone’s software environment. That is, instead of the standard restricted access, the user gets the permissions of a system administrator.

In addition, Android.DreamExploid can download programs from the Internet and install them without the user’s consent (in cases of successful exploitation of the vulnerability).

While Google has removed all known versions of this Trojan horse from its app store and kill-switched the programs already installed on smartphones, the possibility that new versions of the Trojan horse will emerge in Android Market and on other sites can’t be ruled out.

Conclusion

It has been confirmed many times that the growing popularity of an operating system inevitably increases the interest of virus makers towards that particular platform. The situation surrounding Android OS goes along with this trend.

Malicious programs are developing rapidly to keep pace with mobile device technologies. Please remember that the greater the potential of a mobile device, the more opportunities there are for malware to compromise the system and to use its features.

Undoubtedly, you need to be cautious and careful to keep your device safe. However, anti-virus software is another reliable way to reduce the infection risk. To date, Dr.Web virus databases contain entries for more than 120 malicious programs targeting Android. And, obviously, their number will grow.

Posted in DrWebComments Off

App Review: Lookout Security for Android

www.droid-life.com – A thorough review of the Android security application known as Lookout.

Video Rating:

CSA DISCLAIMER: This video taken from YouTube. We are not responsible for any copyright violations, video materials, hacking or cracking activities, or any other. If you have any legal issues, please contact the appropriate host site.

Posted in Android, VideoComments (20)

Critical Log Review Checklist for Security Incidents

This cheat sheet presents a checklist for reviewing critical logs when responding to a security incident. It can also be used for routine log review. (Co-authored with Anton Chuvakin.)

View full post on Lenny Zeltser’s Website

Posted in SecurityComments Off

Grandmasters of cyber-fraud look for gains: November 2010 virus review from Doctor Web

December 3, 2010

In November cyber-criminals demonstrated even greater creativity than before. As a result, anti-virus vendors and users were confronted with new fraud techniques involving bootkit technologies. New modifications of encoder Trojans targeted European users. Criminals seeking the biggest gains attacked online banking systems.

Windows boot blocker

As soon as Trojan.MBRlock.1 appeared in the wild in November, it was employed by cyber-fraudsters. This malicious program is unlike any other malware used to implement fraud schemes.

It bypasses the UAC protection mechanism, so its installation goes unnoticed by users. Once installed, the Trojan writes its code into the MBR and into other nearby disk sectors.

The code, written to the MBR, loads information from the neighbouring disk sectors. The result is a message to users demanding that they pay $ 100 to unlock their systems.

The message also informs a user that all of the files located on all of the computer’s disks are encrypted. This is not true.

In any event curing the Trojan-compromised system can’t be done from inside the system since it wouldn’t boot.

Entering a correct password restores the MBR after which the installed operating system boots normally.

Currently several modifications of Trojan.MBRlock.1 are known, but Dr.Web detects them as the same piece of malware.

To cure the system, enter an ekol or jail unlock code. If neither works, contact the free Doctor Web technical support service for victims of cyber-fraud.

Certain modifications of Trojan.MBRlock.1 had been detected by the Dr.Web heuristic analyzer as MULDROP.Trojan before a corresponding entry was added to the Dr.Web virus database. Dr.Web users were protected from the Trojan even when no virus definitions for this malicious program were available.

New Trojan encoder

Encoder Trojans drew the public’s attention once again in November. This time criminals targeted European users.

Trojan.Encoder.88 uses the AES-256 encryption algorithm to encrypt documents in many popular formats which complicates decryption. To search all possible decryption keys for one that would help restore files on a single computer, 2^256 operations are required. The resulting number exceeds the number that ends in 77 zeros.

A unique encryption key is generated for each compromised machine. It is encrypted using the RSA algorithm and saved to a disk as a text file.

Origins Tracing technology enabled Dr.Web to detect Trojan.Encoder.88 as Trojan.Encoder.origin even before an entry for this program was added to the database.

Fraud in November: winlocks returned

In November the free technical support service received around 4,700 requests from cyber-fraud victims which constituted 42% of all requests. The daily average of requests amounted to 146 which exceeded the October figure by one third.

Trojan.Winlock became the most widely spread malicious program used for fraud (73% of all requests). A significant number of fraud incidents were related to Trojan.Hosts that blocked access to popular web resources.

Criminals also changed routines for converting their profit into actual money. Malicious programs demanding that users send paid short messages were less popular in November, and the number of requests related to such programs reached only 31% of the total. Meanwhile the option that involves paying criminals via terminals became more appealing to fraudsters (60% of all requests).

Banking Trojans on the offensive

November saw the emergence of new Trojans targeting users of online banking systems, both individuals and businesses.

In particular, several modifications of Trojan.PWS.Ibank.213 were added to the Dr.Web virus database.

Variations of the Trojan serve as containers of malicious payloads. Their most harmful feature is their ability to disable security software components. The Trojan can detect whether it is being launched in a virtual environment where it can be safely analyzed. Disabling the system restore service is also among its malicious capabilities.

To collect the information required to access bank accounts online, the Trojan intercepts certain system routines as well as functions of online banking systems, and stores information entered by a user with a keyboard. The fact that Trojan.PWS.Ibank.213 can communicate with a remote server, and download and launch executable files, shows that systems compromised by this program become nodes of a botnet.

November 2010 showed that criminals can make use of various malicious programs to accomplish a wide variety of tasks. When it comes to neutralizing them, anti-viruses capable of protecting a system from all kinds of malware and of curing it proved to be the most efficient. Yet, it is users who still remain the weakest element of the computer defense system. Doctor Web would like to emphasize once again that following basic information security rules dramatically reduces the probability of system infection.

Viruses detected in e-mail traffic in November

 01.11.2010 00:00 – 01.12.2010 00:00 
1 Trojan.DownLoader.62844 887472 (16.61%)
2 Trojan.DownLoad1.58681 560304 (10.49%)
3 Trojan.Packed.20878 409498 (7.67%)
4 Win32.HLLW.Texmer.51 386408 (7.23%)
5 Win32.HLLM.Netsky.18401 317070 (5.93%)
6 Trojan.Oficla.zip 296642 (5.55%)
7 Win32.HLLM.MyDoom.33808 270438 (5.06%)
8 Trojan.Packed.20312 246743 (4.62%)
9 Trojan.DownLoad.41551 231569 (4.33%)
10 Trojan.Oficla.38 139866 (2.62%)
11 Win32.HLLM.Netsky.35328 121814 (2.28%)
12 Trojan.AVKill.2788 103700 (1.94%)
13 Win32.HLLM.Beagle 98470 (1.84%)
14 Trojan.PWS.Panda.114 90471 (1.69%)
15 W97M.Killer 74444 (1.39%)
16 Trojan.DownLoader1.17157 65832 (1.23%)
17 Trojan.PWS.Panda.387 49461 (0.93%)
18 Trojan.Oficla.73 49351 (0.92%)
19 Trojan.Oficla.48 49342 (0.92%)
20 Trojan.Botnetlog.zip 41304 (0.77%)

Total scanned: 40,984,945,769
Infected: 5,342,395

Viruses detected on user machines in November

<

 01.11.2010 00:00 – 01.12.2010 00:00 
1 Win32.HLLP.Neshta 7665428 (24.91%)
2 Win32.HLLP.Whboy.45 6184396 (20.09%)
3 Trojan.DownLoader.42350 2364188 (7.68%)
4 Win32.HLLP.Novosel 1644766 (5.34%)
5 Win32.HLLP.Rox 1177270 (3.82%)
6 Trojan.Click.64310 727694 (2.36%)
7 ACAD.Pasdoc 610404 (1.98%)
8 Win32.HLLM.Dref 520690 (1.69%)
9 Exploit.Cpllnk 413622 (1.34%)
10 VBS.Redlof 320729 (1.04%)
11 Trojan.WinSpy.925 284258 (0.92%)
12 Win32.HLLW.Shadow.based 278980 (0.91%)
13 Trojan.PWS.Ibank.238 252705 (0.82%)
14 HTTP.Content.Malformed 244692 (0.80%)
15 Trojan.MulDrop1.48542 183156 (0.60%)
16 Trojan.Click1.6029 180330 (0.59%)
17 Win32.Sector.22 142436 (0.46%)
18 Win32.HLLW.Kati 121106 (0.39%)
19 Trojan.DownLoad.32973 114280 (0.37%)
20 Win32.HLLW.Autoruner.5555 100817 (0.33%)
Total scanned: 92,810,136,138
Infected: 30,778,334

Posted in DrWebComments Off

Four-star review of SafeCentral

PC Magazine published a review of SafeCentral 2.0 today, giving our latest version 4 stars. You can read the entire review here. Neil Rubenking, the reviewer, looks at a lot of products and has a good eye for what works and what doesn’t. This is his second look at SafeCentral.

If you haven’t given SafeCentral your first look yet, here is a little flash video to whet your appetite. Visit www.safecentral.com for the full story.


Posted in SecurityComments Off

Rising Antivirus 2010 Review And Test

CSA DISCLAIMER: This video taken from YouTube. As well as any other video found on this site is not hosted here, it just embedded, and it taken randomly by our system from video hosting services like YouTube, Metacafe, and others. Therefore, we are not responsible for any copyright violations, video materials, hacking or cracking activities, or any other. If you have any legal issues, please contact the appropriate host site.

Posted in VideoComments (20)

Lorex Wireless Camera Security System Review by Chris Pirillo (Part 2)

CSA DISCLAIMER: This video taken from YouTube. As well as any other video found on this site is not hosted here, it just embedded, and it taken randomly by our system from video hosting services like YouTube, Metacafe, and others. Therefore, we are not responsible for any copyright violations, video materials, hacking or cracking activities, or any other. If you have any legal issues, please contact the appropriate host site.

Posted in VideoComments (5)

Kaspersky AntiVirus 2009 Review


See how KAV 2009 handles hundreds of infections like trojans, rogue antivirus, popups, downloaders, fake system alerts and everything else under the sun! Is it worth your money? Find out!

Posted in VideoComments (25)

Grandmasters of cyber-fraud look for gains: November 2010 virus review from Doctor Web


DrWeb – In November cyber-criminals demonstrated even greater creativity than before. As a result, anti-virus vendors and users were confronted with new fraud techniques involving bootkit technologies. New modifications of encoder Trojans targeted European users. Criminals seeking the biggest gains attacked online banking systems.

Windows boot blocker

As soon as Trojan.MBRlock.1 appeared in the wild in November, it was employed by cyber-fraudsters. This malicious program is unlike any other malware used to implement fraud schemes.


It bypasses the UAC protection mechanism, so its installation goes unnoticed by users. Once installed, the Trojan writes its code into the MBR and into other nearby disk sectors.


The code, written to the MBR, loads information from the neighbouring disk sectors. The result is a message to users demanding that they pay $100 to unlock their systems.


The message also informs a user that all of the files located on all of the computer’s disks are encrypted. This is not true.


In any event curing the Trojan-compromised system can’t be done from inside the system since it wouldn’t boot.


Entering a correct password restores the MBR after which the installed operating system boots normally.


Currently several modifications of Trojan.MBRlock.1 are known, but Dr.Web detects them as the same piece of malware.


To cure the system, enter an ekol or jail unlock code. If neither works, contact the free Doctor Web technical support service for victims of cyber-fraud.


Certain modifications of Trojan.MBRlock.1 had been detected by the Dr.Web heuristic analyzer as MULDROP.Trojan before a corresponding entry was added to the Dr.Web virus database. Dr.Web users were protected from the Trojan even when no virus definitions for this malicious program were available.

New Trojan encoder

Encoder Trojans drew the public’s attention once again in November. This time criminals targeted European users.


Trojan.Encoder.88 uses the AES-256 encryption algorithm to encrypt documents in many popular formats which complicates decryption. To search all possible decryption keys for one that would help restore files on a single computer, 2^256 operations are required. The resulting number exceeds the number that ends in 77 zeros.


A unique encryption key is generated for each compromised machine. It is encrypted using the RSA algorithm and saved to a disk as a text file.


Origins Tracing technology enabled Dr.Web to detect Trojan.Encoder.88 as Trojan.Encoder.origin even before an entry for this program was added to the database.

Fraud in November: winlocks returned

In November the free technical support service received around 4,700 requests from cyber-fraud victims which constituted 42% of all requests. The daily average of requests amounted to 146 which exceeded the October figure by one third.


Trojan.Winlock became the most widely spread malicious program used for fraud (73% of all requests). A significant number of fraud incidents were related to Trojan.Hosts that blocked access to popular web resources.


Criminals also changed routines for converting their profit into actual money. Malicious programs demanding that users send paid short messages were less popular in November, and the number of requests related to such programs reached only 31% of the total. Meanwhile the option that involves paying criminals via terminals became more appealing to fraudsters (60% of all requests).

Banking Trojans on the offensive

November saw the emergence of new Trojans targeting users of online banking systems, both individuals and businesses.


In particular, several modifications of Trojan.PWS.Ibank.213 were added to the Dr.Web virus database.


Variations of the Trojan serve as containers of malicious payloads. Their most harmful feature is their ability to disable security software components. The Trojan can detect whether it is being launched in a virtual environment where it can be safely analyzed. Disabling the system restore service is also among its malicious capabilities.


To collect the information required to access bank accounts online, the Trojan intercepts certain system routines as well as functions of online banking systems, and stores information entered by a user with a keyboard. The fact that Trojan.PWS.Ibank.213 can communicate with a remote server, and download and launch executable files, shows that systems compromised by this program become nodes of a botnet.


November 2010 showed that criminals can make use of various malicious programs to accomplish a wide variety of tasks. When it comes to neutralizing them, anti-viruses capable of protecting a system from all kinds of malware and of curing it proved to be the most efficient. Yet, it is users who still remain the weakest element of the computer defense system. Doctor Web would like to emphasize once again that following basic information security rules dramatically reduces the probability of system infection.

Viruses detected in e-mail traffic in November 01.11.2010 00:00 – 01.12.2010 00:00 1Trojan.DownLoader.62844887472 (16.61%)2Trojan.DownLoad1.58681560304 (10.49%)3Trojan.Packed.20878409498 (7.67%)4Win32.HLLW.Texmer.51386408 (7.23%)5Win32.HLLM.Netsky.18401317070 (5.93%)6Trojan.Oficla.zip296642 (5.55%)7Win32.HLLM.MyDoom.33808270438 (5.06%)8Trojan.Packed.20312246743 (4.62%)9Trojan.DownLoad.41551231569 (4.33%)10Trojan.Oficla.38139866 (2.62%)11Win32.HLLM.Netsky.35328121814 (2.28%)12Trojan.AVKill.2788103700 (1.94%)13Win32.HLLM.Beagle98470 (1.84%)14Trojan.PWS.Panda.11490471 (1.69%)15W97M.Killer74444 (1.39%)16Trojan.DownLoader1.1715765832 (1.23%)17Trojan.PWS.Panda.38749461 (0.93%)18Trojan.Oficla.7349351 (0.92%)19Trojan.Oficla.4849342 (0.92%)20Trojan.Botnetlog.zip41304 (0.77%)
Total scanned:40,984,945,769Infected:5,342,395Viruses detected on user machines in November01.11.2010 00:00 – 01.12.2010 00:00  1Win32.HLLP.Neshta7665428 (24.91%)2Win32.HLLP.Whboy.456184396 (20.09%)3Trojan.DownLoader.423502364188 (7.68%)4Win32.HLLP.Novosel1644766 (5.34%)5Win32.HLLP.Rox1177270 (3.82%)6Trojan.Click.64310727694 (2.36%)7ACAD.Pasdoc610404 (1.98%)8Win32.HLLM.Dref520690 (1.69%)9Exploit.Cpllnk413622 (1.34%)10VBS.Redlof320729 (1.04%)11Trojan.WinSpy.925284258 (0.92%)12Win32.HLLW.Shadow.based278980 (0.91%)13Trojan.PWS.Ibank.238252705 (0.82%)14HTTP.Content.Malformed244692 (0.80%)15Trojan.MulDrop1.48542183156 (0.60%)16Trojan.Click1.6029180330 (0.59%)17Win32.Sector.22142436 (0.46%) 18Win32.HLLW.Kati121106 (0.39%) 19Trojan.DownLoad.32973114280 (0.37%) 20Win32.HLLW.Autoruner.5555100817 (0.33%)Total scanned:92,810,136,138Infected:30,778,334

View the original article at DrWeb Blog

Posted in DrWebComments Off

Interesting Online Armor ++ video review

There is a new private review made by “Languy” who is very active in some security forums. In his video he shows the functionality of Online Armor ++ with standard settings and newest updates.

He visits some suspicious websites and downloads several files to test the security level of the firewall including the “RunSafer” function. As this procedure can be considered as a normal usage scenario, it proves the effectivity of Online Armor ++.

Watch the complete video here:

Full story: Anti-Malware Reviews

Posted in AntivirusComments Off

Mobile Drive Secure Review

CSA DISCLAIMER: This video taken from YouTube. As well as any other video found on this site is not hosted here, it just embedded, and it taken randomly by our system from video hosting services like YouTube, Metacafe, and others. Therefore, we are not responsible for any copyright violations, video materials, hacking or cracking activities, or any other. If you have any legal issues, please contact the appropriate host site.

Posted in VideoComments (17)

2010 in Review: Same Old Spammers

2010 has been an active year both for spammers and anti-spammers alike. No new spamming techniques or tricks were used in 2010. However, the spammers kept the spam threat alive and kicking by recycling old tricks and combining popular spamming techniques seen in the past. Here are some of the notable spam types and techniques that continued to circulate this past year.

Pharmaceutical and other health-related spam remained the most notorious type throughout the year. This spam type was not limited to selling pharmaceutical products online, the spammers also used these messages to disguise their phishing and malware attacks.

Phishing attacks not only targeted banks. Phishers gradually switched their focus to target popular social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, and the like. Sometimes, links in email messages redirected users to fake sites where their credentials were stolen. At other times, the links led to affiliate marketing sites such as online pharmacies or replica product websites.

Social engineering was on the rise all year long using different noteworthy events and topics like the tax season, Wikileaks, and social networking sites to spread malware.

Online gambling and casino-related spammed messages were especially prevalent in Europe where such activities were less strictly regulated than in North America. This spam type was frequently seen written in Spanish. Similarly, German was used in many spammed messages selling replicas in the third quarter as well. Other non-English spammed messages contained dating, adult, and commercial content.

Nigerian scams and fake lottery notifications also continued to proliferate in 2010. We saw multiple variants presented in different styles and used varying techniques.

Spam that carried malicious files or links to malware were also seen in 2010 with the proliferation of malware-related spam or “mal-spam” outbreaks. These frequently used conversational sentences such as “Thanks! Best Regards” with a personal signature at the end of email. The malware were attached to such messages.

Breaking news events—real or otherwise—were also used such as a popular actor/actress supposedly getting into a car accident with a link or attachment that led to malware. Other mal-spam also used online postcard greetings to get users to go to malicious links or to download malicious attachments.

Another type of spam that was frequently seen this year was salad word spam. The content of this type was noncommercial, non-advertising, and not related to any business in nature. It could be an article or extracted from a website or even a paragraph from a biography. Some salad spam had no meaning while others were written with poor grammar. Some contained as few as 2–3 random characters. It’s possible, in fact, that these messages were sent more to gather “live” email addresses rather than to actually conduct attacks.

Some of the most common spamming techniques in 2010 were:

  • Embedded images in messages were actually downloaded from URLs. Salad words were added at the end of the main mail body.
  • Messages were made to resemble legitimate email messages from well-known sites such as Amazon but the link actually led to Canadian pharmacy sites.
  • The messages’ body contained salad words while .ZIP file attachments contains an image that linked to a site where the actual content was located.
  • Spammed messages with only one URL in the message body and very few or no other words.
  • Using HTML tricks to make large numbers of salad words at the bottom of the email message invisible.

One fact we noticed last year was that more spammed messages were prone to present their messages not only in the email body but also in the attachment. Examples of these include:

  • Medical spam with a .ZIP file attachment that contained an image
  • Fake lottery notification messages that also used .DOC and .PDF files
  • Scam mail that used .DOC files for actual messages

Overall, there wasn’t much change in 2010 as far as spam was concerned. What we did see were tweaks and relatively minor changes to what we saw in previous years.

Post from: TrendLabs | Malware Blog – by Trend Micro

2010 in Review: Same Old Spammers

Full story: TrendLabs | Malware Blog – by Trend Micro

Posted in AntivirusComments Off

2010 in Review: 2010′s Most Dangerous List

As 2010 comes to a close, here’s a list of the riskiest items we encountered in the past year:

  • Hardware The riskiest hardware device used in 2010 was the German identification card reader. These cards contain encoded private information such as fingerprints. Unfortunately, the information on them can be quite easily stolen by using certain card readers.
  • Website Software The riskiest software used by websites in 2010 was the popular blogging platform WordPress. Tens of thousands of unpatched WordPress blogs were used by cybercriminals for various schemes, primarily as part of redirection chains that led to various malware attacks or other blackhat search engine optimization (SEO)-related schemes.
  • IP The most dangerous Internet Protocol used in 2010 was Internet Relay Chat (IRC). Thirty percent of all botnets used IRC to communicate with infected machines and their command-and-control (C&C) servers. Fortunately, blocking IRC use in networks reliably stops botnets.
  • OS The riskiest OS used was Apple’s Mac OS X. In November, Apple sent users a massive maintenance release that weighed in at at least 644.48 MB. The weighty upgrade included fixes for multiple security vulnerabilities since the previous update released in mid-June. Apple’s penchant for secrecy and longer patch cycles also increased the risk for users.
  • Website The most dangerous website in the world was Google. Its tremendous popularity led cybercriminals to target it specifically for blackhat SEO-related schemes, which in turn led users to significant malware threats, particularly FAKEAV. In addition, Google’s ad network was also frequently victimized by malvertisements.
  • Social Network In another case wherein popularity led to danger, Facebook could be considered the most dangerous social networking site around. Everything from survey scams to KOOBFACE malware proliferation ensued on the site, as cybercriminals went where the people were, that is, Facebook.
  • Top-Level Domain The most dangerous top-level domain in the world was CO.CC, which allowed cybercriminals to register thousands of domains on the fly with very little in the way of verification. This, along with Russian ISPs that routinely refused to shut down malicious sites, made for a very dangerous combination.
  • File Format PDF was the riskiest file format in 2010, as Adobe Acrobat and Reader vulnerabilities routinely became part of exploit toolkits.
  • Runtime Environment The most dangerous runtime environment for users in 2010 was Internet Explorer (IE) with scripting enabled. Even today, most browser exploits specifically target IE. However, Java is quickly becoming a more prominent target and could become the prime target in 2011.
  • Infection Channel The most common infection channel was still the browser, as more than two-thirds of all infections used this as infection vector. Previous infection methods like flash disks and spammed messages were still around but were less prominent than before.

Post from: TrendLabs | Malware Blog – by Trend Micro

2010 in Review: 2010′s Most Dangerous List

Full story: TrendLabs | Malware Blog – by Trend Micro

Posted in AntivirusComments Off

2010 CyberCrime & Doing Time: Year In Review

As we look back on 2010, I’d like to thank our 132,325 Visitors who read more than 214,000 stories on the blog which is a bit more than a 10% increase over our 2009 readership. I thought it might be interesting to go through the year month by month and review what stories were most interesting to our readers, based on the number of times each article was read.

January

USAA Bank Latest Avalanche Scam

Iranian Cyber Army returns – target: Baidu.com

China Iran Cyberwar???

February

Fake Photo version of Zeus

Conficker.B Microsoft Warning Spam

March

Most Dangerous Cities for Cyber Crime

PKK Hackers Arrested in Turkey

April

70 Romanian Phishers & Fraudsters Arrested

Fake AV In the News

May

I actually didn’t blog in May between grading finals and getting ready for several firsts at UAB, including our first Computer Foreniscs Camp for high schoolers, and our first National Science Foundation Research Experiences for Undergraduates in Cybercrime Investigations.

(Note: We are already taking applications for the UAB Crime REU which has three tracks, Criminal Justice, Forensic Science, and Computer Forensics. If you know an undergrad with a passion for Cybercrime investigation who would like to earn $ 450 per week, plus room and board, have them follow that link for an application!)

So, instead of giving you a CyberCrime & Doing Time story, let’s look at MY favorite Security Blog, Krebs On Security.com.

My top story in May was probably the Fraud Bazaar Carders.cc Hacked.

June

Anna Chapman and Mikhail Semenko vs. the FBI

Pro-Gaza Hackers Target Israeli Websites

IRS Malware: “Notice of Underreported Income” spam

Four Russian Spay Couples (& Two Solo Acts)

Russian Spies – Tradecraft and Follow the Money

178 International Credit Card Fraudsters Arrested

July

PakBugs Hackers Arrested

Stealing $ 10 Million, 20 cents at a time

The Future of Cyber Attack Attribution

ICE Operation In Our Sites

August

New Facebook Attack gives a One-Two Punch

Major Fraud Ring Busted in Largest Chinese Cybercrime Operation

September

17 Zeus Money Mules wanted by New York FBI

“Here You Have” spam spreads email worm

“Here You Have” Hype & Electronic Jihad

October

FBI’s Operation ACHing Mule

November

Lin Mun Poo: Hacker of the Federal Reserve Bank and . . . ?

USAA Phish: Avalanche Uses many “Redirectors”

Another M00P Group Member Arrested

December

Oleg Nikolaenko, Mega-D Botmaster, to Stand Trial

Operation: Payback Origins

Internet Anarchy: Anonymous Crowds Flex Their Muscles

Full story: CyberCrime & Doing Time

Posted in SecurityComments Off

2010 in Review: 10 Most Remarkable Malware in 2010

The end of 2010 is near and I thought I’d take the time out to recap how the year has been malware-wise. This is my list of the top 10 most remarkable malware families that surfaced in 2010:

  1. STUXNET. It was remarkable because of its sophistication and use for espionage. It was thought to have been programmed to halt Iran’s nuclear program. I don’t think it will be the last malware family that will be used to spy on others and/or for industrial sabotage. It was a big deal also because of its heavy use of previously undiscovered software vulnerabilities in Windows.
  2. Aurora. It hit Google and other big software companies last Christmas and it was remarkable because it managed to steal sensitive information from these giants.
  3. ZeuS. It’s a Do-It-Yourself (DIY) botnet toolkit that has become very popular in the underground. It has spawned lots of different botnets that have stolen millions of dollars from home users and companies alike. The fact that it’s an off-the-shelf piece of software hints at the current state of malware as a multipurpose weapon.
  4. SpyEye. Touted as ZeuS’s successor, recent accounts tell how it will carry ZeuS’s source code into a more sophisticated code base. It has a similar concept to ZeuS and also comes in the form of a DIY toolkit.
  5. KOOBFACE. It was remarkable because it spread through social networks from Facebook to Twitter. It caused enough headaches for Facebook that the social networking giant finally decided to add a CAPTCHA to its link-submitting form.
  6. BREDOLAB. A botnet that was used to spread other malware, it acted as some sort of malware-deploying platform. It was remarkable because it was taken down by the Dutch police in September 2010 after its Georgian creator amassed millions of dollars thanks to it.
  7. TDSS/Allurion. A very sneaky rootkit that managed to cause bluescreen errors on a lot of computers in February 2010 when a new Microsoft update changed the files that it used to infect the systems. It had one of the most complex rootkit components ever seen and apparently a very shrewd development team behind it.
  8. Mebroot. A spamming botnet that used a rootkit that could survive Windows re-installation. It hides very deep in a system so it loads even before Windows does. It’s responsible for a big percentage of all of the spam traffic worldwide.
  9. FAKEAV. Though strictly not a virus, it’s the scam of choice of most of modern malware so all infections have a fake antivirus scam as a visible payload. The creation of Russian partnerkas (or affiliation programs) let third parties get money for every successful scam job performed. This enabled fake antivirus groups to become the con artists of the year helped by virus creators everywhere.
  10. Boonana. The Mac version of KOOBFACE in the sense that it copied KOOBFACE’s method of spreading via social networks. It was remarkable because it brought most of KOOBFACE’s functionality to the Mac platform, making it a whole different beast that could open a new can of worms in the growing platform.

Have a great 2011 and stay safe.

Post from: TrendLabs | Malware Blog – by Trend Micro

2010 in Review: 10 Most Remarkable Malware in 2010

Full story: TrendLabs | Malware Blog – by Trend Micro

Posted in AntivirusComments Off

2010 in Review: The Vulnerability Landscape

The number of software vulnerabilities (as measured by entries in the Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) database) went down in 2010, although due to the complexity of modern programs they can never be completely eliminated. Criminals take advantage of this to drop their malware onto the systems of victims everywhere.

Because of this, there is a continued need for vulnerability defense solutions like Intrusion Defense Firewall (IDF), a plug-in for OfficeScan™ and Deep Security.

In recent years, both vulnerability researchers and criminals have been focusing their attacks on third-party applications. This is quite natural, as both Internet-exposed services (such as Web servers) and the OSs themselves have been made more secure. This focus on third-party applications increases the risk for typical end users, as they tend to ignore third-party programs as primary attack vectors. In addition, no common patching platform like Windows Update is provided, raising the risk of having vulnerable versions on user systems.

Let’s examine the number of publicly disclosed proof-of-concept (POC) exploits that allowed remote code execution in several applications that users commonly utilize (these are based on exploits posted on the Exploits Database site):

Application(s) Number of Exploits
Internet Explorer 7
Mozilla Firefox 3
Adobe products (Flash and Acrobat/Reader) 16
Java 4


Note the number of exploits for third-party applications above compared with browsers. Both Adobe and Java exploits are very reusable, as the vulnerable applications are present on most user systems. In addition, these can be obfuscated to bypass network-based intrusion protection systems.

Out of these critical vulnerabilities in 2010, the ones which had the most impact in the wild were:

It’s also worth noting that the DOWNAD/Conficker threat, which dates back to late 2008, was still quite active during the first half of the year. DOWNAD isn’t quite dead yet.

What kind of malware are dropped or downloaded onto user’s systems by exploits? Variants of the ZeuS family of malware were favored payloads throughout 2010. In particular, exploits using .PDF files and ActiveX controls as infection vectors were frequently used for this purpose.

These threats highlight how important it is for users to properly protect themselves against vulnerabilities by patching their software. For that, readers should consult the previous blog post “Have You Patched Your System Lately?” The CTO Insights blog also talked about it in the video “Zero Day Vulnerabilities Risk Overblown.”

Post from: TrendLabs | Malware Blog – by Trend Micro

2010 in Review: The Vulnerability Landscape

– Abhishek Bhuyan (Senior Security Researcher) on TrendLabs | Malware Blog – by Trend Micro

Posted in AntivirusComments Off

2010 in Review: No Recession for Cybercrime

The cybercrime underground saw relatively few really revolutionary developments in 2010. However, while the rest of the world was in the economic doldrums, the cybercrime underground kept growing.

Researchers who monitored the cybercrime underground noted that the number of Trojans targeting information and credential theft significantly rose in 2010. This was not surprising, as we noted earlier that the number of new information-stealing malware families was on the rise.

One development in 2010, however, was the complete failure of certain domain registrars to properly police their customers. This allowed certain top-level domains to be heavily abused and used to host hundreds of thousands of malicious domains. Because of this, blocking a single domain name has been of limited value, as the domains became essentially disposable for the criminals using them.

While, in theory, these registrars are “legitimate”, their lax policies allow widespread abuse of their services by cybercriminals. To illustrate the scale of the problem, one of these registrars claimed on its front page that it had more than 7.5 million domains, very few of which are actually legitimate.

On a more positive note, there were some high-profile arrests and takedowns of cybercrime networks in 2010. In March, the Spanish authorities arrested the ringleaders of what was called the Mariposa botnet, which stole information from approximately 12.7 million users around the world. An even bigger operation codenamed Trident Breach led to arrests in the United States, Britain, and the Ukraine of more than 50 individuals involved in a ZeuS gang that targeted small and medium-sized businesses. In late October, Armenian and Dutch law enforcement agencies worked together to arrest a 27-year-old man that was behind the Bredolab botnet.

Those arrests were noteworthy in large part because they arrested actual ringleaders of the gangs involved and not just low-ranking money mules. More than arresting mules or shutting down servers, arresting the criminals behind these attacks was necessary to stop these activities.

The futility of takedowns was seen when Pushdo/Cutwail was taken down earlier this year. Within days, it was back in business. Similarly, security researchers were able to take down the Waledac botnet in March, but as we noted at the time, spam levels remained unchanged.

The lesson is that shutting down a botnet by purely technical means doesn’t do anything in the long term; arresting the people responsible is key to fixing the cybercrime threat.

Trend Micro partners with many law enforcement agencies around the world. Together with these partners, we continuously work to help bring those responsible for today’s online threats to a court of law. We expect these partnerships to be busier than ever in the upcoming year.

Post from: TrendLabs | Malware Blog – by Trend Micro

2010 in Review: No Recession for Cybercrime

– Paul Ferguson (Senior Threat Researcher) on TrendLabs | Malware Blog – by Trend Micro

Posted in AntivirusComments Off

Ollydbg Dump of "svchost.exe" Process

Bredolab Trojan – Malware Review

Two months ago, the authorities in the Netherlands announced a massive botnet takedown of Bredolab Trojan. Despite these efforts, the Bredolab Trojan is still spreading malware on user’s machines.

Unlike the Zeus or SpyEye Trojans, the Bredolab Trojan is a pretty simple and has limited capabilities, which is similar to the Ofikla Trojan.  It’s functionality was reviewed in a very interesting and detailed blog of Kaspersky Lab Expert Alexei Kadiev “End of the Line for the Bredolab Botnet?” Our blog sheds a light on additional aspects of Bredolab communication, its evasive techniques and C&C functionality.

Let’s take a step by step look at how the Trojan operates.

Once the malware is executed, it copies itself to a temp folder and injects code into “svchost.exe” process.  It then generates a key and sends basic information.

Ollydbg Dump of "svchost.exe" Process

Ollydbg Dump of "svchost.exe" Process

The bot wraps up the data and sends it to the command and control server.

The bot Communicates with the Command and Control Server

The bot Communicates with the Command and Control Server

The following is a screenshot of Virus Total scan results (16/41) for the latest generated malware:

Virus Total Results of Bredolab Trojan

Virus Total Results of Bredolab Trojan

As mentioned, Bredolab, unlike the Zeus Trojan, doesn’t have local configuration files pre-generated by the malware operator.  The Trojan operates like a Trojan Dropper; it receives the malware, saves it on the hard disk or in the memory according to the Trojan operator, and then loads it.

Along with the Trojan itself, the operator manages the Trojan using a Control Panel called “BManager” which contains the following functionalities:

  • Statistics of the controlled bots
  • Downloaded and executed malwares sent by the operator
  • Manages users of the administration panel
  • Create bots commands

The BManager control panel provides real time information on the infected machines:

BManager Statistics

BManager Statistics

BManager Statistics Divided by Country

BManager Statistics Divided by Country

Besides statistics, the tool provides the administrator management over user accounts along with specific permission for each section in the control panel.

As mentioned previously, the main objective of the tool is to download and execute malware onto the victim’s machine.
The control panel supplies the cybercriminal a variety of capabilities such as:

  • Location to save the malware (Hard disk / Memory)
  • Define specific regions that will or will not receive certain malware
  • Time limit in which to execute the malware

Once the malware is successfully installed on the victims’ machine, it becomes much more complicated for AV companies to detect any activity committed by Bredolab Trojan. Looking closely at the traffic sent from the server to the victim shows how the downloaded executable is encrypted in a unique way for each machine, rendering AV pattern detection useless.

Incoming traffic Sent from the C&C to the bot

Incoming traffic Sent from the C&C to the bot

The screenshot above describes the information sent by the Command &Control. The image shows that the server adds 2 additional parameters:

  • “Rnd”: A number generated by the client, re-generated by the server, and sent back to the bot.

“Magic-Number”: A new key generated by the server that is sent to the client to de-crypt the malware

Bredolab, Generate Key Algorithm
Bredolab, Generate Key Algorithm

The server is using the “Rnd” key sent from the bot and generates a new key. Meanwhile it loads the relevant malware to load for the specific bot.

Bredolab, encrypt the loaded malware

Bredolab, encrypt the loaded malware

The new malware package is encrypted using the encryption key and sent to the bot along with the “Rnd” and the “Magic-Number” as described earlier.

Bredolab, Keys sent to the bot for Forwarded Communication

Bredolab, Keys sent to the bot for Forwarded Communication

While instances of the Bredolab Trojan can still be found in the wild and used by cybercriminals, it is expected that it will gradually decrease over time.

– Daniel Chechik on M86 Security Labs Blog

Posted in AntivirusComments Off

A review of Norton mobile security beta1.0.0.49 for smartphones



CSA DISCLAIMER: This video taken from YouTube. As well as any other video found on this site is not hosted here, it just embedded, and it taken randomly by our system from video hosting services like YouTube, Metacafe, and others. Therefore, we are not responsible for any copyright violations, video materials, hacking or cracking activities, or any other. If you have any legal issues, please contact the appropriate host site.

Posted in VideoComments Off

2010 in Review: New and Better Ways of Stealing Information

As we mentioned earlier this week, information stealers were still the most serious threat in 2010 and will probably be so moving forward. There were three major developments in this area in 2010.

ZeuS 2.0 Emerged

The ZeuS/ZBOT family of information stealers released a new version in the first half of the year. ZeuS 2.0 made significant under-the-hood changes to the already successful ZeuS family of malware.

In terms of actual information theft, the differences were relatively modest. Before, support for newer versions of Windows such as Windows Vista and Windows 7 or alternative browsers like Mozilla Firefox was not integrated into the toolkits “core” functionality; ZeuS 2.0 made this standard.

The big changes in ZeuS 2.0 were meant to make it more stealthy. Where ZeuS 1.x versions used fixed file names (which sometimes changed from version to version), version 2.0 used random names. Similarly, mutexes also used pseudo-randomly generated GUID names. (In addition to making it more stealthy, these allowed multiple ZeuS infections to affect one machine, which was not the case with 1.x). The encryption ZeuS used was also strengthened.

In addition to (temporarily) making ZeuS more difficult to detect, these steps also made gathering threat intelligence somewhat more difficult although since then, the security industry has learned how to deal with ZeuS 2.0′s increased sophistication.

We discussed ZeuS 2.0 in the following blog posts:

ZeuS Competitors Appeared (and Took Over?)

ZeuS’ success continued into 2010, which may have fertilized the ground for its competitors. The price for a ZeuS toolkit rose to as high as US$ 8,000 for the basic package without any additional features. Additional modules and features can push the price up to as high as US$ 20,000. This led to the appearance of more information-stealers in 2010, the foremost of which was SpyEye.

The origins of SpyEye date back to 2009 though it only caught our attention for the first time when one of our analysts found a SpyEye variant. This particular variant was noteworthy because it terminated known ZeuS processes, thus eliminating the competition, so to speak. SpyEye was, and still is, cheaper than ZeuS: the basic package costs only US$ 1,000; additional features could raise the overall price tag to $ 2,500–in both cases, far less than ZeuS toolkits.

Further investigation led to our discovery of multiple SpyEye control panels featured in:

Eventually, SpyEye “won.” On October 1, an international effort codenamed Operation Trident Breach led to the shutdown of a ZeuS gang and the arrest of over a hundred people. Those arrested included some of the gang’s ringleaders. It’s probably not a coincidence that within weeks, it was announced that ZeuS’ author (known as Slavik or Monstr) announced his “retirement” and passed ZeuS on to the SpyEye author, Gribodemon or Harderman. An official merger has been announced though this does not appear to have been implemented yet. However, speculation is rife that Slavik will actually continue to write malware for his higher-paying elite clients.

ZeuS’ New Tricks

In October, Trend Micro first found samples of a new ZeuS variant, TSPY_ZBOT.BYZ, that had unusual routines. In addition to its normal information theft routines, it also infected executable files on systems—a behavior not usually seen in previous ZeuS variants. These infected files, in turn, used a dynamic domain generation algorithm (DGA) to download malicious files (including the original ZeuS variant) from various websites.

This was a dangerous development, as the last malware to use DGA download routines was DOWNAD/Conficker. The in-depth analysis revealed a well-engineered threat, the results of which was documented in our white paper, “File-Patching ZBOT Variants: ZeuS 2.0 Levels Up.”

We continue to see new ZeuS variants that use the techniques first seen in TSPY_ZBOT.BYZ with different seed values used for their DGAs (which change the domains generated). This indicates that this tactic has become “standard” for at least some syndicates.

Taken together, these developments highlight our predictions for 2011—malware threats are becoming more advanced in terms of tactics. This is particularly true for information-stealers, for whom stealth and escaping notice are particularly important.

– Kevin Stevens and Loucif Kharouni (Senior Threat Researchers) on TrendLabs | Malware Blog – by Trend Micro

Posted in AntivirusComments Off

White House orders security review in wake of WikiLeaks disclosure

The White House has ordered all federal agencies to review systems for protecting sensitive data due to the latest release of potentially damaging classified data by WikiLeaks. – on Computerworld Security News

Posted in SecurityComments Off

PC Magazine Four-Star Review of SafeCentral 2.6

We earned 4 stars in the PC Magazine review of SafeCentral 2.6 that review that appeared on Friday. I am very happy to see the review up on the PCMag.com home page.

The reviewer, Neil J. Rubenking, commends our ease-of-use and the real-time feedback we give users on the safety of their web sessions. Our support for 64-bit platforms, including XP, Vista and Windows 7 was also noted.

One of the “Cons” in the review is the closed nature of the SafeCentral browser. We do not allow any and all browser plugins. We see this as a strong positive. On our work computers we are used to the network admins at our companies limiting what we can install and run, and which websites we visit. We understand that these constraints are necessary to protect company assets. Now is the time for us to recognize that we need to exercise the same control over our home PCs and laptops. When we sign into our bank or online retirement account, we should think and act differently–we have more to protect at this moment that when we are watching the latest funny YouTube video or posting a photo to Facebook.

Just like the iPhone is carefully managed by Apple to ensure the quality and security of iPhone applications, we recognize that browser plugins can introduce additional risks into sensitive web sessions and seek to protect users from those risks. Increased security almost always comes with some impact on usability. With SafeCentral, though, you still can use your regular browser and those Digg and Flickr toolbars to do all your fun stuff. Use SafeCentral for serious web stuff like banking, stock trading and tax filing.

– on SafeCentral Blog

Posted in AntivirusComments Off

F-Secure Internet Security 2010 TP Review

F-Secure is one of the most used antiviruses around the world and many never even know they are using it (ISP’s rebrand it). Let’s see what kind of protection broadband users will access to in the near future.

This is a very nasty virus that is running rampant on the internet as of January 2010. In many cases people have lost their entire computer to it so it’s a really bad one. Be sure to go to the link below and read the instructions very carefully. Also be sure to follow the instructions exactly as they are stated. That will help you fix this issue and get it off of your computer. This should also work on Desktop Security virus and Desktop Defender Virus. Here is the link to the article: www.softsailor.com Here is the link to malwarebytes which is free and you will need this to fix the problem: www.malwarebytes.org Step 1: Go here and download Malwarebytes Anti-Malware for free. Save the file to your desktop. If Internet Security 2010 does not allow you to download anything, you should download the setup on another computer and use an USB stick or a CD/DVD to transfer the files needed. Remember to place the setup file on the desktop. Step 2: Click here to download the rkill.com file. download.bleepingcomputer.com Once the download is complete, run it. The rkill.com file will make sure the Internet Security 2010 will be closed for good so it does not interfere with the removal process. Step 3: Close all open applications and windows. You now should be on the desktop. Step 4: Run the Malwarebytes Anti-Malware setup from the desktop. Step 5: Go with the default settings during the install. CRUCIAL: Make sure you tell the software to automatically update itself (theres a box you

Posted in VideoComments (50)

About.com review of Sophos Anti-Virus for Mac Home Edition

Free Sophos Anti-Virus for Mac review by About.com

Excuse us for blowing our own trumpet for a second, but About.com has given a rave review to the new Sophos Anti-Virus for Mac Home Edition.

About.com review of Sophos Anti-Virus for Mac Home Edition

Mary Landesman, reviewing on behalf of About.com, says

"the protection literally is business-grade - the free version is based on the same Mac virus scanner Sophos uses in their Endpoint Security line. Best of all, Sophos Anti-Virus for Mac Home Edition detects both Mac and Windows malware."

Sophos Anti-Virus for Mac Home Edition intercepting Mac malware. Click for a larger version

Rating the free Mac anti-virus product a maximum 5 out of 5 stars, the review concludes:

"Sophos Anti-Virus for Mac Home Edition offers more complete scanning than most of its competitors - detecting not just Mac malware but Windows malware as well. This alone puts them ahead of the pack in Mac antivirus protection. But Sophos goes one step further, offering Sophos Anti-Virus for Mac free to home users. For Mac users in search of antivirus, this may just be an offer that's too good to pass up."

You can read the full review on the About.com website.

This is just the latest in a series of great reviews the free anti-virus product has had, including the extensive examination done by the folks at SecureMac.

Don’t forget if you’re a home user you can download the free anti-virus for your Mac now.

Okay, I’ll put my trumpet away now..

Source: Naked Security – Sophos

Posted in AntivirusComments Off

Security Status

Beware Facebook "Timeline" scams http://t.co/W5EW0cVv
1 month ago
Nigerian government (unknowingly) hosts phishing website http://t.co/uQd42ENw
1 month ago
PCMag Awards McAfee All Access its Editors’ Choice: SANTA CLARA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--McAfee today announced... http://t.co/FakV7Vd8
1 month ago
RT @mikko: I hadn't noticed Google Maps has added 3D models of buildings. Here's a (very accurate) view of F-Secure HQ in Helsinki http://t.co/IKfAZlak
1 month ago
North Koreans aren't known for their online presence. But others may be lured into clicking Kim Jong-Il 'videos' too http://t.co/yQOon6YT
1 month ago
How to Protect Your Professional Reputation on Facebook Timeline http://t.co/I4bcR2VN
1 month ago
This is pretty impressive from @Softpedia: Facebook scans 2 trillion link clicks and blocks 220 million posts each day http://t.co/vKsn9gNl
1 month ago
Need for integrated approach to security in industrial control systems - http://t.co/tPBCNOow with @PikeResearch
1 month ago
Some free-based music we play at work http://t.co/xu5agZfc
1 month ago
Japan’s cyber defense weapon: a virus. It includes quotes by @Luis_Corrons via @InfosecurityMag
1 month ago