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

    Security Community in Dispute over Severity of WMF Flaw

    By
    Larry Seltzer
    -
    January 5, 2006
    Share
    Facebook
    Twitter
    Linkedin

      Inspired somewhat by the Department of Homeland Security Threat Advisory Level (or was it the other way around?), Symantec maintains a global threat level called ThreatCon, defined as “a measurement of the global threat exposure, delivered as part of Symantec DeepSight Threat Management System.”

      On Tuesday, Symantec elevated ThreatCon to a level 3 (out of 4) out of concern for the potential threats from the WMF vulnerability in Windows.

      For some perspective, this is the first time ThreatCon has been this high since July 2004 for MyDoom.M, when it actually hit the maximum level of 4 (which I think indicates Global Thermonuclear War). Prior to that it had reached 3 in May 2004 for Sasser.

      /zimages/6/28571.gifClick here to read more about smart WMF remediation.

      Needless to say, ThreatCon at level 3 is not a common occurrence, and I agree its been a while since we had a really serious threat on our hands. Its also fair to say that Symantec is extremely concerned about the WMF vulnerability, in spite of the fact that they havent identified any actual attacks of any importance.

      Theres logic to this, since they fear that even if everyone can protect themselves, and even if users with updated anti-virus are protected (a controversial hypothesis, but assume it for the sake of argument), there are still large numbers of systems that are completely unprotected.

      Microsoft uses a number that 50 percent of systems out there dont have updated anti-virus protection, and most outside observers think that 50 percent is an optimistic number.

      Symantec isnt alone. Perhaps the most influential piece of writing in the gloom and doom school of this particular problem was this diary entry by Tom Liston of the Internet Storm Center. “Ive written more than a few diaries, and Ive often been silly or said funny things, but now, Im being as straightforward and honest as I can possibly be: the Microsoft WMF vulnerability is bad. It is very, very bad.“

      Actually, now that Microsoft has announced they are releasing the update early I bet Symantec downgrades. But of course, theres also some large percentage of users who dont apply updates, and theyll still be vulnerable. Its not over yet.

      Next Page: Not an “elite” threat.

      Not an Elite Threat

      I was very concerned at first too, but it always seemed to me that this was not in the “elite” level of vulnerabilities.

      Those are reserved for network worms, the most famous of which were Blaster and Sasser.

      These are attacks that can exploit a remote computer purely by sending commands and data to it over the network. These are the attacks you can suffer just by installing a new copy of Windows and putting the machine on the Internet to get updates.

      The WMF flaw suffers by comparison to these problems. No computers can be attacked without the user actually clicking on a link or opening an attachment.

      There are many other mitigating factors, although the one I just mentioned really is the most important. And the fact that a patch has now been issued definitely ratchets down the threat level.

      At least I think it should, but I was one of the ones who never thought it was a first-class emergency anyway, and Im not alone either, although I get the feeling Im in the minority.

      /zimages/6/28571.gifFor advice on how to secure your network and applications, as well as the latest security news, visit Ziff Davis Internets Security IT Hub.

      Neither, it appears, did Microsoft. Im sure they released the patch today mostly to preempt the third-party patches that were appearing and because of the anxiety out there, not because of the actual level of threat.

      The reason for regular monthly patch days is to let IT plan for updates and do them on a regular schedule, so its only worth going out of cycle when the threat is really urgent or when IT is so worried that they want it anyway.

      In this case I think the hysterical press this subject got put enough customer pressure on Microsoft that it was worth going out of cycle, after it was worth “accidentally” leaking a copy of the patch a couple of days ago.

      So what explains the difference in opinions? Of course Im a partisan here, so theres a limit to how objective I can be, but I see a couple of factors.

      One is a dispute over how many users are dumb enough to open attachments in messages from strangers on an unprotected computer, or click links in them.

      My contention is that almost anyone who could get hit by this probably has already had their computer compromised by adware or some other form of malware.

      Nothing is added to the malware “ecosystem” by compromising these machines with the WMF flaw; theyre already owned.

      Ive had a theory for years that the systems being infected with all the more prominent worms were being serially infected with all of them.

      Its not hard to see why, either because of the suckers who own the computers opening every attachment that comes their way or outsiders using the backdoors to install new malware.

      But there are large, very large numbers of computers that never get any of these attacks and barely ever see the messages with them, because they are properly protected. Its easy and not too expensive to do so.

      And with every day that passes, I feel more comfortable with my outlook.

      I must say though that Im surprised we never even see a moderately widespread attack. Its over a week now since proofs of concept were available, and still all I see are experiments.

      Last weekend the consensus was that when everyone came back to their computers after the holiday, they were heading in like lambs to the slaughter. Malicious WMFs would spread backdoors and pornography throughout the Internet.

      The way I see it, the WMF vulnerability is perhaps slightly worse than a bad mail worm episode, and its been a long time since any of them were serious problems. The recent Sober attack was serious, but hardly a crisis.

      We havent had a really bad one since that MyDoom.M episode I mentioned earlier, and that one got all the attention only because of large numbers of submissions; thats not the same thing necessarily as large numbers of infections.

      The longer we go without the sky falling, the more likely it is to stay up.

      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/6/28571.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
      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
      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
      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.

      ×