Close
  • Latest News
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Big Data and Analytics
  • Cloud
  • Networking
  • Cybersecurity
  • Applications
  • IT Management
  • Storage
  • Sponsored
  • Mobile
  • Small Business
  • Development
  • Database
  • Servers
  • Android
  • Apple
  • Innovation
  • Blogs
  • PC Hardware
  • Reviews
  • Search Engines
  • Virtualization
Read Down
Sign in
Close
Welcome!Log into your account
Forgot your password?
Read Down
Password recovery
Recover your password
Close
Search
Logo
Logo
  • Latest News
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Big Data and Analytics
  • Cloud
  • Networking
  • Cybersecurity
  • Applications
  • IT Management
  • Storage
  • Sponsored
  • Mobile
  • Small Business
  • Development
  • Database
  • Servers
  • Android
  • Apple
  • Innovation
  • Blogs
  • PC Hardware
  • Reviews
  • Search Engines
  • Virtualization
More
    Home Cybersecurity
    • Cybersecurity

    No Solution at Hand for the Malware Naming Mess

    By
    Larry Seltzer
    -
    September 29, 2005
    Share
    Facebook
    Twitter
    Linkedin

      In the heat of a malware outbreak there is usually a lot of confusion about what variant of what worm is involved? Is it just a new variant or a completely new worm?

      Inconsistencies between vendors about variant indices and virus names add to the confusion.

      The latest effort to address this problem is the CME (Common Malware Enumeration) Initiative from a company called MITRE but sponsored by US-Cert. These are the same people who brought us CVE (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), the project on which CME is based.

      The idea is to assign a specific identifier to each malware implementation.

      To illustrate the problem, consider the table below containing data from AV-Test, a research project at the Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg (Germany).

      Anti-Virus ProductID For This VirusAntiVirTR/Bagle.DGAVGI-Worm/BagleBitDefenderWin32.Bagle.JK@mmClamAVWorm.Bagle.BWCommandW32/Mitglieder.FSDr WebWin32.HLLM.Beagle.35146eSafTrojan/Worm (suspicious)eTrust-INOWin32/Glieder.BN!TrojaneTrust-VETWin32.Glieder.BVEwidoWorm.Bagle.dsF-ProtW32/Mitglieder.FSF-SecureEmail-Worm.Win32.Bagle.dsFortinetW32/Bagle.DA-trIkarusEmail-Worm.Win32.Bagle.genKasperskyEmail-Worm.Win32.Bagle.dsMcAfeeNew Poly (virus or variant)Nod32Win32/Bagle.CT wormNormanW32/BaglePandaW32/Bagle.EN.wormQuickHealBagle.dsSophosTroj/BagleDl-USymantecTrojan.Tooso.QTrend MicroTROJ_BAGLE.DAVBA3Email-Worm.Win32.Bagle.dsVirusBusterTrojan.DL.Bagle.Gen!Pac3

      Next Page: What CME is up against.

      What CME Is Up


      Against”>

      This data is from a recent Bagle outbreak, and most if the identifications are of Bagle, but theyre almost all different specific variants.

      Many (such as Ikarus) use a generic identifier.

      Think of the confusion this might cause, and specifically look at the three big anti-virus companies: McAfee, Symantec and Trend Micro use names bearing no resemblance to each other.

      Theres definitely a problem here, and its not an inconsequential one. But Cert is being restrained in their claims about CME and they should be.

      Its not going to solve the problem.

      CVE is much more successful, although its basically a behind-the-scenes system.

      It is used to identify vulnerabilities. Frequently, if not most of the time, it is the vendor of a product who works with MITRE to assign a CVE candidate number to a vulnerability.

      Vulnerabilities are usually disclosed to the world by one researcher or firm and accompanied by a definition of their nature. Malware is different.

      /zimages/5/28571.gifClick here to read more about US-CERT issuing uniform names for computer viruses, worms and other malicious code.

      Malware isnt disclosed, it is released to the world without announcement.

      In the first hours, different anti-virus companies will be getting copies, in some cases arguing (as the table above illustrates) what exactly the threat is.

      A procedure has been defined by CME wherein submissions will be sent and a candidate number assigned.

      There are checks in place to try to avoid duplicate submissions and subscribing anti-virus companies are expected to use the ID number, perhaps in addition to their own name, in all correspondence.

      If this works it will be great, but theres reason to believe that it will end up being just another name to look at.

      Anti-virus companies already share code samples extensively through back channels, and still there are often disagreements during outbreaks about whether new threats are really new.

      Id be shocked if the CME system supplants the more fun naming systems in place.

      Part of the glory a researcher gets for finding and identifying a new malware is to name it, and they wont give that up easily.

      Plus, the numbering system doesnt convey the existence of families of malware, such as Bagle, and the relationships between them.

      You might assume that Sober.A and Sober.B are closely related, but are CME-123 and CME-124? Not necessarily.

      Finally, having a single identifier in place, if the system would be really successful, would help make it clearer which anti-virus companies react faster and better than others, although AV-Test already has good testing to make that clear.

      Such clarity isnt necessarily in the interest of the largest companies in the business.

      I seem to be saying this a lot lately: I dont have a better idea; I think the problem is basically insoluble.

      If were lucky, CME can gain general acceptance, and that will make things somewhat clearer, but I worry that too many factors are working against it.

      Security Center Editor Larry Seltzer has worked in and written about the computer industry since 1983. He can be reached at larryseltzer@ziffdavis.com.

      /zimages/5/28571.gifCheck out eWEEK.coms for the latest security news, reviews and analysis. And for insights on security coverage around the Web, take a look at eWEEK.com Security Center Editor Larry Seltzers Weblog.

      Larry Seltzer
      Larry Seltzer has been writing software for and English about computers ever since—,much to his own amazement—,he graduated from the University of Pennsylvania in 1983.He was one of the authors of NPL and NPL-R, fourth-generation languages for microcomputers by the now-defunct DeskTop Software Corporation. (Larry is sad to find absolutely no hits on any of these +products on Google.) His work at Desktop Software included programming the UCSD p-System, a virtual machine-based operating system with portable binaries that pre-dated Java by more than 10 years.For several years, he wrote corporate software for Mathematica Policy Research (they're still in business!) and Chase Econometrics (not so lucky) before being forcibly thrown into the consulting market. He bummed around the Philadelphia consulting and contract-programming scenes for a year or two before taking a job at NSTL (National Software Testing Labs) developing product tests and managing contract testing for the computer industry, governments and publication.In 1991 Larry moved to Massachusetts to become Technical Director of PC Week Labs (now eWeek Labs). He moved within Ziff Davis to New York in 1994 to run testing at Windows Sources. In 1995, he became Technical Director for Internet product testing at PC Magazine and stayed there till 1998.Since then, he has been writing for numerous other publications, including Fortune Small Business, Windows 2000 Magazine (now Windows and .NET Magazine), ZDNet and Sam Whitmore's Media Survey.
      Get the Free Newsletter!
      Subscribe to Daily Tech Insider for top news, trends & analysis
      This email address is invalid.
      Get the Free Newsletter!
      Subscribe to Daily Tech Insider for top news, trends & analysis
      This email address is invalid.

      MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

      Latest News

      Zeus Kerravala on Networking: Multicloud, 5G, and...

      James Maguire - December 16, 2022 0
      I spoke with Zeus Kerravala, industry analyst at ZK Research, about the rapid changes in enterprise networking, as tech advances and digital transformation prompt...
      Read more
      Applications

      Datadog President Amit Agarwal on Trends in...

      James Maguire - November 11, 2022 0
      I spoke with Amit Agarwal, President of Datadog, about infrastructure observability, from current trends to key challenges to the future of this rapidly growing...
      Read more
      IT Management

      Intuit’s Nhung Ho on AI for the...

      James Maguire - May 13, 2022 0
      I spoke with Nhung Ho, Vice President of AI at Intuit, about adoption of AI in the small and medium-sized business market, and how...
      Read more
      Applications

      Kyndryl’s Nicolas Sekkaki on Handling AI and...

      James Maguire - November 9, 2022 0
      I spoke with Nicolas Sekkaki, Group Practice Leader for Applications, Data and AI at Kyndryl, about how companies can boost both their AI and...
      Read more
      Cloud

      IGEL CEO Jed Ayres on Edge and...

      James Maguire - June 14, 2022 0
      I spoke with Jed Ayres, CEO of IGEL, about the endpoint sector, and an open source OS for the cloud; we also spoke about...
      Read more
      Logo

      eWeek has the latest technology news and analysis, buying guides, and product reviews for IT professionals and technology buyers. The site’s focus is on innovative solutions and covering in-depth technical content. eWeek stays on the cutting edge of technology news and IT trends through interviews and expert analysis. Gain insight from top innovators and thought leaders in the fields of IT, business, enterprise software, startups, and more.

      Facebook
      Linkedin
      RSS
      Twitter
      Youtube

      Advertisers

      Advertise with TechnologyAdvice on eWeek and our other IT-focused platforms.

      Advertise with Us

      Menu

      • About eWeek
      • Subscribe to our Newsletter
      • Latest News

      Our Brands

      • Privacy Policy
      • Terms
      • About
      • Contact
      • Advertise
      • Sitemap
      • California – Do Not Sell My Information

      Property of TechnologyAdvice.
      © 2022 TechnologyAdvice. All Rights Reserved

      Advertiser Disclosure: Some of the products that appear on this site are from companies from which TechnologyAdvice receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site including, for example, the order in which they appear. TechnologyAdvice does not include all companies or all types of products available in the marketplace.

      ×