A quick & dirty guide to malware (part 2: viruses)

A dialogue screen shown by Virus:W32/Duts.A

This is the second posting in a three-part series covering common threats a user may encounter.

This series serves as a rough and ready guide, highlighting key features and trends relevant to most users.

The One That Left

Last week I spoke of Trojans, Viruses and Worms as The Big Three. I lied a bit, though. Viruses – as a distinct malware type – probably shouldn’t be on that list any more.

Viruses have always loomed large in users’ minds as the poster child of malicious programs – heck, we even call it the anti-virus industry. In the last 10 years or so however, the number of virus infections has nosedived; our Labs, which once dealt with viruses routinely, now sees a proper virus infection about once or twice a month. Today when people talk of ‘viruses’, more often than not what they’re describing is technically a trojan or a worm, and they’re using the term in a general, ‘any malware will do’ kind of way.

That’s not to say viruses are extinct; we still receive a small, if persistent, number of queries about viruses. This may be because many businesses, households and users (both in developed countries and in recently connected developing ones) still use old, out-dated, unpatched machines or programs, or haven’t yet developed a security-conscious habits.

Whatever the case, virus infections will probably still cling on to life for a weary day after, so let’s take a look at them.

Highlights of a virus

Definition of a virus given by Merriam-Webster online dictionary

The Merriam-Webster online dictionary’s bare-bones definition of a computer virus touches on important elements most users should know, so I’ll just elaborate a bit more on some key concepts:

“usually hidden within another seemingly innocuous program”

Last week I compared a virus to a parasite, because not only does it ‘hide’ in another program, but also depends on its host to function. For the virus to run, the unsuspecting user must actively launch the infected program, which in turn launches the virus.

For this reason, virus writers usually create viruses that infect executable files (especially popular programs such as word processors or media files), which have a higher chance of being run; programs with files that get passed around a lot are extra attractive, since they can affect even more potential victims.

A good example is the Microsoft Office suite which, with their huge community of business and personal users, used to be a popular target for macro viruses. We still see queries related to this virus type, though thankfully far less than previously.

“Produces copies of itself and inserts them into other programs”

If you think of the common cold virus spreading from one person to another, you’ll have a pretty good idea of why this behavior can be so damaging. When a infected file is executed, it searches for and infects new files; if the newly infected files are launched, they find and infect new files in turn, like some evil Multi-Level Marketing operation. At worst, this pattern can lead to every targeted file on the system being infected.

“Usually performs a malicious action”

The damage a virus can do by replicating and infecting new files is bad enough; its payload, a completely separate set of nasty actions, can be worse. The range of actions a virus can take is huge – connecting to a remote site, changing the desktop wallpaper, displaying silly notification messages, deleting data files…it really just depends on the virus author’s imagination and programming skills.

If you’re lucky, they’re not that good and you get failed viruses like Virus:W32/Stardust; if they’re good, then you get really nasty beasts like Virus:W32/Virut or Virus:W32/Sality.AA (one of the few viruses we still find regularly active).

Appending, prepending, cavity…who cares?

A dialogue screen shown by Virus:W32/ZMK

With thousands of unique viruses out in the wild, antivirus companies find it necessary to divide them into sub-types. Unlike trojans though, viruses don’t fall into neat categories reflecting their actions; instead, they naturally fall into groupings based on technical differences in the way they infect a file – which is  basically gobbledeegook to a user not interested in detailed analysis.

Gnerally, viruses can be divided into two groups – system infectors and file infectors. The majority of viruses are the latter and infect programs or data files. System infectors on the other hand write their malicious code to specific, critical sections of the hard disk containing the operating system, so that while the OS is running its normal routines, it’s also unintentionally executing the virus code.

Fortunately, for most users a virus’s classification is largely academic. For better or for worse, the sheer variety of possible effects each unique virus can have on a file or system makes it more practical to take each virus on a case by case basis.

Back to what’s important – why should the user  care?

So let’s go back to the original question that sparked off this series: do you really need to know if it’s a virus – as opposed to, say, a trojan or worm – infecting your computer?

Well, it helps to know because the two malware types tend affect your data and computer in different ways. As a (very) general rule, trojan infections is more about data theft and loss of control over the computer; virus infections tend to result in software disruptions or damage.

Trojans may copy and steal your data, but they don’t usually destroy the data file itself; they may stop programs from running but they don’t destroy the program. A virus on the other hand, insert its own code into a program or data file, and depending on how it does so, may either leave the host completely unharmed and functional, slightly disrupted, or completely non-functional.

Another difference between trojans and viruses that really affects the user involves disinfection. For one thing, a trojan is usually a single, discrete program – getting rid of it tends to be fairly simple, a matter of removing the malicious file and its residuals (registry keys, processes, icons, etc). Removing the trojan also generally doesn’t affect the integrity of other files on the computer.

Viruses are far more nebulous by design – they can be present in multiple files, in different locations. Identifying a virus-infected file may require scanning the entire computer to be sure every affected file is caught. Removing malicious code from an infected file or – if it can’t be saved, deleting the infected file entirely – can also be problematic if the damaged data is important or the program is a critical system component.

And this doesn’t even take into account the virus’s payload, which can produce a whole other set of worries.

If you’re still interested

Still, there is a ray of hope. If current malware trends persist, we may soon see adware or backdoors promoted to being the newest member of The Big Three, and viruses – as a distinct malware type – can finally be relegated to joining 3½” floppy disks in Computer Hell.

In the meantime, here’s some links to other, more in-depth resources on viruses:

Or partially available on Google Books:

  • “Elements of Computer Security” by David Salomon
  • “Cybercrimes: A Multidisciplinary Analysis” by Sumit Ghosh

Next

Coming soon – Worms!

More posts from this topic

snowden_crowd

Snowden Says Drop Dropbox; Here’s What You Said

In his recent video interview with The New Yorker, Edward Snowden advised viewers to get rid of Dropbox, Facebook and Google, saying such services are dangerous and should be avoided. But what do consumers think? Are you and I ready to follow his advice and switch to more secure services? To find out what people really think, we consulted our recent global consumer survey* where we had asked people just those types of questions. Here's what we found: 53% of survey respondents said they’d be willing to switch from services like Google to other more private services to avoid search-based profiling. 56% of people said they have become more wary of US-based Internet services in the past year. 46% of people said they would be willing to pay to be sure that none of their personal data transits via the US. 70% said they are concerned about the potential of mass surveillance by intelligence agencies in countries through which their data may be passing. 68% of respondents said they try to protect their privacy at least some of the time through the use of private browsing or incognito mode or by encrypting their communications. 57% of people said they are not okay with companies using their profile data in exchange for getting a free service. Germany, Brazil and the Philippines showed some of the highest levels of concern about data privacy. For example, when asked whether they’ve changed some of their Internet habits in recent months due to increased concerns about data privacy, an average of 56% of people said they had: 45% in the UK, 47% in the US, and 49% in France, and going even higher to 60% in Germany and 67% in both Brazil and the Philippines. Are you ready to start using more private, secure services too? If so, F-Secure has some great options. Our online storage and sync service, younited, is fully encrypted for security and privacy from the ground up. F-Secure Freedome encrypts your connection wherever you are, even on public WiFi, and protects you from hackers and Internet trackers. And free F-Secure App Permissions lets you know which mobile apps you've installed are a threat to your privacy.   *The F-Secure Consumer Values Study 2014 consisted of online interviews of 4,800 age, gender and income-representative respondents from six countries, 800 respondents per country: US, UK, France, Germany, Brazil and the Philippines. The study was designed together with Informed Intuitions. Data was collected by Toluna Analytics in July 2014.   Image courtesy of greensefa, flickr.com    

Oct 29, 2014
BY 
Whistle

How to blow the whistle and survive

Whistleblowers have changed the world and there’s still a lot of hidden secrets that the public really should know about. High-profile leakers like Snowden, Manning and Assange are known globally, and are paying a high price for their courage. But only a few are dedicated enough to blow the whistle in public - most leakers want to carry on with their normal lives and remain anonymous. Snowden did no doubt show the way for others, and there are already several who have tried to leak and remain anonymous. That’s not easy and the stakes are high! Which is underlined by the recent news about the feds discovering one leaker. But is it even possible to leak anonymously in this word that in many ways is worse than Orwell’s fictive surveillance nightmare? Let’s list some advice for the case you would like to leak by phone to a journalist. I guess not many of you readers will ever be in a situation where you need this. But read on, this is highly interesting anyway and tells a lot about how our digital word works. Ok, let’s assume the worst case. The secrets you want to leak affects US national security, which means that your enemy is powerful and can use top surveillance against you. Let’s also assume it’s info you have authorized access to. And that you want to talk on the phone to a journalist. Here’s some basic rules and hints that may prevent you from ending up behind bars. First you need to assess how many persons have access to the data. They will all be on a list of suspects, together with you. The shorter the list, the bigger the risk for you. Your mobile phone is a tracking device. The cell phone network knows what base station you are connected to at any time. Other services can record and store even GPS-accurate position data. All this is accessible to the agents and you must make sure it doesn’t reveal you. Needless to say, your own phone does not participate in this project. You need to find out who you should leak to. Never do this research from your own computer because your search history can reveal you. It leaves traces both in your computer and in your user profile at Google (unless you know what you are doing and use privacy tools properly). Do this research from a public computer. Make sure you have never logged in to any personal account from this computer. You need a “burner phone” to do the leaking. This is a phone that can’t be connected to your identity in any way. Here’s some rules for how to use it: It is always switched off with the battery removed when not in use. Just using the power button does not cut power from all parts of the device. It is never switched on in or close to your home. The agents can easily find out what base station it was connected to and turning it on near home can make you more suspected than others. It is never switched on in or close to your vehicle. Base station records for the phone may correlate with traffic cameras storing your registration plate. This is especially important if you have a modern car with a built-in data connection for service monitoring etc. Never user the burner for any other contacts. Even a single call to your spouse creates a record that ties you to the phone. Needless to say, never store any other info in the phone than what you need for this project. You always leave your own phone at home when going out to use the burner phone. Otherwise the agents can see that your own phone “happen” to be in the same base station when the burner is used. Leave your own phone turned ON at home when you go out with the burner. Otherwise you create a recognizable pattern where your own phone turns off and the burner turns on, and vice versa, in a synchronized manner. Leave any other wireless devices at home. Tablets, wireless mobile payment devices, anything else with a radio transmitter. Using a voice changer is necessary especially if the list of suspects is short. Assume that your calls can be recorded and your own voice checked against the recording. Get the burner phone. Scout for a dealer with old-looking or insufficient security cameras located not too close to your home. Remember that the agents may locate the shop where the burner phone was sold, get the security camera recording and compare against the list of suspects. Even better, ask someone else to buy the phone for you. Choose a cheap non-smart prepaid phone with removable battery. Pay cash and make sure you don’t reveal your identity to the seller in any way. Safely destroy any receipts and other paperwork related to the purchase. Think about where to store physical items that can tie you to the leak. Such items are the burner phone and related documents or data media. This is especially important if the list of suspects is short. Storing such items at home, at your workplace or in your vehicle will reveal you if the agents perform a search. Try to find some other place that is safe and can’t be tied to you. Now you are ready to contact the journalist. Be very rigid with the rules for how to use the burner phone. There are also some additional rules for this situation: Dress discreetly to avoid sticking out in surveillance camera footage. Be far enough from home when making the call. Turn the burner on, make the call and turn it off again right away. Avoid public places with surveillance cameras when the burner is on. Do not use your credit card during this trip. Pay cash for everything. Any other personal payment instruments, like public transportation payment cards, is a big no-no as well. You have to assume that journalists dealing with leaks are being watched constantly. Assume that the hunt is on as soon as you have made the first contact. Try to wrap up the project as quickly as possible and minimize the number of times you turn on the burner phone. When you are done, dispose all items related to the leak in a secure way. The trash can of your own house is NOT secure. Dump the phone in the river or put it in a public trash sack far enough from home. The truly paranoid leaker will break the phone with gloves on. The outer shell can contain fingerprints or traces of your DNA and the electronics the traceable phone ID. It’s good to make sure they end up in different places. Huh! That’s a lot to remember. Imagine, all this just for maintaining privacy when making a phone call! But you really need to do it like this if the big boys are after you and you still want to continue as a free citizen. I hope you never need to go through all this, and also that you do it right if you have to. Disclaimer. This text is mainly intended as a demonstration of how intrusive the surveillance society is today. We provide no guarantee that this will be enough to keep you out of jail. If you really plan to become a whistle blower, research the topic thoroughly and get familiar with other sources as well (but remember what I wrote about researching from your own computer).   Safe whistle blowing, Micke  

Oct 28, 2014
BY 
Privacy principles 2

Your privacy is our pride, part 2 of 3 – security is a fundament

Welcome back to this tree post series about F-Secure’s privacy principles. The first post is here. We have already covered the fundaments, the importance of privacy. In short, that is how we avoid collecting unnecessary data, and never misuse what we collect for purposes not endorsed by you. But that’s not enough. We take on a great responsibility as soon as your data is stored on our systems. It’s not enough that we have good intents, we must also ensure that others with malicious intents can’t misuse your data. That’s what we talk about today. NO BACKDOORS Many government agencies show an increasing interest in data ordinary people store in cloud services. There are several known cases where vendors have been forced to implement backdoors allowing agencies to examine and fetch users’ data. F-Secure operates in countries where we can’t be forced to do this, so you are secured against bulk data collection. But we are not trying to build a safe haven for criminals. We support law enforcement when a warrant is issued against a defined suspect based on reasonable suspicions. We do cooperate with officials in these cases, but validate each warrant separately. THERE IS NO PRIVACY WITHOUT SECURITY It’s not enough to promise we don’t misuse your data ourselves. We must make sure that no one else can either. This is done by applying high security standards to all planning and implementation work we do. Another security aspect is our own personnel. We have technical systems and processes that prevent employees from misusing your data. WE CHOOSE SERVICE PROVIDERS WE CAN TRUST Today’s complex systems are rarely built from ground up by one company. That’s the case for our systems as well. The level of security and privacy is defined by the chain’s weakest link, and this means that we must apply the same strict principles to technology partners and subcontractors as well. Customers should never have to think what licensed services a product contains. We naturally carry full responsibility for what we deliver to you, and our privacy principles cover it all even if we rely on services and code made by someone else. The last three principles will be covered in the next and final post. Stay tuned.   Safe surfing, Micke    

Oct 27, 2014
BY