Threat report conclusion: Patch now!

h2_2012_infographic#1544C6EOur Threat report for H2 2012 is now available. Read it if you want to know what’s going on and what the threat landscape is looking like. It is interesting reading, highly recommended! If you are in a hurry and want to save the reading for later, there’s still one point that affects most users and deserves immediate attention. Vulnerabilities and patching.

One of the major trends is no doubt the increasing importance of exploits and vulnerabilities. And you have probably already heard the nagging about how important it is to patch your system. That IS good advice and our threat report shows how it is getting even more important. But I don’t want to just repeat the nagging. I want to take the opportunity to dig a bit deeper into this issue and explain what it is all about.

There are basically two ways to get malware into your computer; to trick you to install it and to utilize a vulnerability. All software in your computer is written by humans, and as we know, “mistake” is our human race’s middle name. Mistakes in computer programs are called bugs and a vulnerability is a special type of bug. Many bugs just affect the functionality of the program. Something may not work or work in an unexpected way. Applications are supposed to handle errors in a graceful way. But they may encounter erroneous data that the programmer didn’t anticipate. The application wreaks havoc and starts behaving in an unplanned way, and this may breach security. If this can happen, then there’s a vulnerability in the system.

An exploit is data that is carefully crafted by a hacker. Its purpose is to create an error that is no accident . What happens after the error is not chaotic after all; it is orchestrated by the hacker. He has at this point gained unauthorized control and the next task is to make sure that some malware is installed permanently on the system. The attacker has successfully exploited a vulnerability.

This may happen by just visiting a web page. The web page is a document that is rendered by your browser. If your browser has a vulnerability and you visit the wrong page you may be victim of a so called drive-by download. You surf the page comfortably unaware of the fact that a program silently is installed on your computer. And that’s not a friendly program!

But I have bought an antivirus program for good money. Doesn’t that protect me? Yes, that’s good. But we still recommend that you pay attention to patches as well. Your security product will detect and block malware that is about to execute. It will monitor your file transfers over the net and block harmful content. It will even check what sites you surf and warn when entering hostile territory. And if all that fails, executing programs are watched for suspicious behavior. But all this is a cat and mouse game. The bad guys come up with new clever tricks to circumvent all these layers and the security researchers upgrade the product to cope with them. If you are unlucky you can hit malware that your product can’t cope with yet. Remember that no product will ever give you 100% protection no matter what the sleek marketoids are claiming! But you are still fine if you have patched the vulnerability that the bad guys try to exploit. The malware has to go through that bottleneck so why not plug the hole? It can’t be done by your security vendor; it must be done by the vendor of the affected software. Your security suite can just build layers of security around the hole, but not correct errors in other products.

OK, I’m convinced. I want to start patching my system now. But how? One problem is that you probably have software from several vendors on your system. They all have to produce patches for their own product and there is no single outlet that would provide patches for all vendors. That’s one of the reasons why we have made F-Secure Safe Check . This free tool checks the security of your system from several different angles; your patching status is one of them. And you will get instructions about how to patch if that is needed. Why not run it right away!


PS. Some definitions: (Source: Wikipedia)

“In computer security, a vulnerability is a weakness which allows an attacker to reduce a system’s information assurance.”

“An exploit (from the verb to exploit, in the meaning of using something to one’s own advantage) is a piece of software, a chunk of data, or sequence of commands that takes advantage of a bug, glitch or vulnerability in order to cause unintended or unanticipated behaviour to occur on computer software, hardware, or something electronic (usually computerised).”

A patch is a piece of software designed to fix problems with, or update a computer program or its supporting data. This includes fixing security vulnerabilities and other bugs, and improving the usability or performance.”

More posts from this topic


Why your Apple Watch will probably never be infected by malware

On Tuesday Apple announced its latest iPhone models and a new piece of wearable technology some have been anxiously waiting for -- Apple Watch. TechRadar describes the latest innovation from Cupertino as "An iOS 8-friendly watch that plays nice with your iPhone." And if it works like your iPhone, you can expect that it will free of all mobile malware threats, unless you decide to "jailbreak" it. The latest F-Secure Labs Threat Report clears up one big misconception about iOS malware: It does exist, barely. In the first half of 2014, 295 new families and variants or mobile malware were discovered – 294 on Android and one on iOS.  iPhone users can face phishing scams and Wi-Fi hijacking, which is why we created our Freedome VPN, but the threat of getting a bad app on your iOS device is almost non-existent. "Unlike Android, malware on iOS have so far only been effective against jailbroken devices, making the jailbreak tools created by various hacker outfits (and which usually work by exploiting undocumented bugs in the platform) of interest to security researchers," the report explains. The iOS threat that was found earlier this year, Unflod Baby Panda, was designed to listen to outgoing SSL connections in order to steal the device’s Apple ID and password details. Apple ID and passwords have been in the news recently as they may have played a role in a series of hacks of celebrity iCloud accounts that led to the posting of dozens of private photos. Our Mikko Hypponen explained in our latest Threat Report Webinar that many users have been using these accounts for years, mostly to purchase items in the iTunes store, without realizing how much data they were actually protecting. But Unflod Baby Panda is very unlikely to have played any role in the celebrity hacks, as "jailbreaking" a device is still very rare. Few users know about the hack that gives up the protection of the "closed garden" approach of the iOS app store, which has been incredibly successful in keeping malware off the platform, especially compared to the more open Android landscape. The official Play store has seen some infiltration by bad apps, adware and spamware -- as has the iOS app store to a far lesser degree -- but the majority of Android threats come from third-party marketplaces, which is why F-Secure Labs recommends you avoid them. The vast majority of iPhone owners have never had to worry about malware -- and if the Apple Watch employs the some tight restrictions on apps, the device will likely be free of security concerns. However, having a watch with the power of a smartphone attached to your body nearly twenty-four hours a day promises to introduce privacy questions few have ever considered.    

Sep 9, 2014
BY Jason

How should we deal with defamation and hate speech on the net? – Poll

Everybody probably agree that the net has developed a discussion culture very different from what we are used to in real life. The used adjectives vary form inspiring, free and unrestricted to crazy, sick and shocking. The (apparent) anonymity when discussing on-line leads to more open and frank opinions, which is both good and bad. It becomes especially bad when it turns into libel and hate speech. What do you think about this? Read on and let us know in the poll below. We do have laws to protect us against defamation. But the police still has a very varying ability to deal with crimes on the net. And the global nature of Internet makes investigations harder. Most cases are international, at least here in Europe where we to a large extent rely on US-based services. This is in the headlines right now here in Finland because of a recent case. The original coverage is in Finnish so I will give you a short summary in English. A journalist named Sari Helin blogged about equal rights for sexual minorities, and how children are very natural and doesn’t react anyway if a friend has two mothers, for example. This is a sensitive topic and, hardly surprising, she got a lot of negative feedback. Part of the feedback was clear defamation. Calling her a whore, among other nasty things. She considered it for a while and finally decided to report the case to the police, mainly because of Facebook comments. This is where the really interesting part begins. Recently the prosecutor released the decision about the case. They simply decided to drop it and not even try to investigate. The reason? Facebook is in US and it would be too much work contacting the authorities over there for this rather small crime. A separately interviewed police officer also stated that many of the requests that are sent abroad remain unanswered, probably for the same reason. This reflects the situation in Finland, but I guess there are a lot of other countries where the same could have happened. Is this OK? The resourcing argument is understandable. The authorities have plenty of more severe crimes to deal with. But accepting this means that law and reality drift even further apart. Something is illegal but everybody knows you will get away with the crime. That’s not good. Should we increase resourcing and work hard to make international investigations smoother? That’s really the only way to make the current laws enforceable. The other possible path is to alter our mindset about Internet discussions. If I write something pro-gay on the net, I know there’s a lot of people who dislike it and think bad things about me. Does it really change anything if some of these people write down their thoughts and comment on my writings? No, not really. But most people still feel insulted in cases like this. I think we slowly are getting used to the different discussion climate on the net. We realize that some kinds of writing will get negative feedback. We are prepared for that and can ignore libel without factual content. We value feedback from reputable persons, and anonymous submissions naturally have less significance. Pure emotional venting without factual content can just be ignored and is more shameful for the writer than for the object. Well, we are still far from that mindset, even if we are moving towards it. But which way should we go? Should we work hard to enforce the current law and prosecute anonymous defamers? Or should we adopt our mindset to the new discussion culture? The world is never black & white and there will naturally be development on both these fronts. But in which direction would you steer the development if you could decide? Now you have to pick the one you think is more important.   [polldaddy poll=8293148]   Looking forward to see what you think. The poll will be open for a while and is closed when we have enough data.   Safe surfing, Micke  

Sep 8, 2014
BY Micke