New Internet worm targeting Windows

[waltky]

Mon Aug 15, 2005

A new Internet virus targeting recently uncovered flaws in Microsoft Corp.'s Windows operating system is circulating on the Internet, an anti-virus computer software maker said on Monday.

The ZOTOB virus appeared shortly after the world's largest software maker warned of three newly found "critical" security flaws in its software last week, including one that could allow attackers to take complete control of a computer.

Trend Micro Inc. said that the worm exploits security holes in Microsoft's Windows 95, 98, ME, NE, 2000 and XP platforms and can give computer attackers remote access to affected systems.

"Hundreds of infection reports were sighted in the United States and Germany," Tokyo-based Trend Micro said.

But computer security engineers at Microsoft said that the worm is only targeting Windows 2000 and not the other versions of Windows.

"It only affected Windows 2000," said Stephen Toulouse, a manager at Microsoft's Security Response Center. "So far its has shown a very limited impact -- we're not seeing any widespread impact to the Internet, but we remain vigilant."

The latest virus drops a copy of itself into the Windows system folder as BOTZOR.EXE and modifies the system's host file in the infected user's computer to prevent the user from getting online assistance from anti-virus Web sites, Trend Micro added.

More (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2005-08-15T184155Z_01_DIT538409_RTRIDST_0_TECH-SINGAPORE-VIRUS-DC.XML)

[PrntRhd]

I asked you nicely to not post complete text from articles without attribution to the source.

It is a copyright violation to copy articles and post them without specific permission from the author/website/publication where you saw the original article.

© Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved.
This article is one from Reuters and is copyrighted by them.

This site does not allow posting of copyrighted articles without permission of the copyright owner.

[waltky]

"I asked you nicely to not post complete text from articles without attribution to the source."

If you will look at the bottom, you will indeed find an accrediting link labeled either More or Source or the URL of the page itself (which you must have clicked on to learn where the article was attributed from) which leads back to the article such as the following:

Computers hit in three continents
Microsoft in 'emergency response' as worm reported on three continents
Wednesday, August 17, 2005

A fast-moving computer worm Tuesday attacked computer systems using Microsoft operating systems, shutting down computers in the United States, Germany and Asia.

Among those hit were offices on Capitol Hill, which is in the midst of August recess, and media organizations, including CNN, ABC and The New York Times. Caterpillar Inc., in Peoria, Illinois, reportedly also had problems.

A small number of computers in an administrative office at San Francisco International Airport also crashed, but they were not essential to the airport's operation, spokesman Mike McCarron said.

The FBI said the computer problems did not appear to be part of any widespread attack.

While the worm affects primarily Windows 2000, it also can affect some early versions of Microsoft XP, said Johannes Ullrich, chief technology officer of the Sans Institute, a network security firm based in Jacksonville, Florida.

Symptoms include the repeated shutdown and rebooting of a computer.

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/08/16/computer.worm/index.html]<<<<<HERE!!

Edited to reveal source...

[ErnieK]

MS released a patch for this a few days ago (8th Aug) for XP as well as for Win2k. MS states that XP(SP2) is not affected but there is a patch download for it. the patch number is KB899588. This was released a couple of days later as well with an update to it.

[pop pop]

waltky,

Not a good move to butt heads with the mods. They do what they do and ask what they ask for very good reasons, in this case to protect this wonderful site from litigation. It doesn't matter whether you or I think the posting was legal. Charles (the owner) and the mods would simply rather not take the risk based on someone else's opinion. Besides, it's very easy to comply and still share information.

Please respect the rules and their requests and we'll all benefit.

[waltky]

Not encapsulating the link within HTML that leads back to the source is no problem since it means less typing as long as there are no complaints about the link causing excessive scrolling due to the length of the link (some are up to three lines long). By truncating the link two purposes are served, 1. to reduce excessive scrolling while 2. at the same time pointing to and giving accreditation to the source. This is and has been since the days of BBS a universally accepted practice on the net. If you would like I can provide a few other websites where you can view how it works and familiarize yourself with the technique.

[PrntRhd]

The big issue with the worm is the time of the patch release to the onset of the exploit is now down to less than 5 days. This puts tremendous pressure on IT departments to upgrade and also on Microsoft to get the patch right. There are three different worms competing now, each try remove the other worms.

[waltky]

True.

Computer virus writers moving faster with attacks
Wed Aug 17, 2005

U.S. media companies and other corporations hit by a wave of computer viruses this week said business was back to normal on Wednesday, but analysts warned the attacks showed hackers have gained a dangerous advantage in speed in the battle over network security.

ABC news writers resorted to typewriters to prepare copy for the "World News Tonight" broadcast on Tuesday, as the network and other media companies, including The New York Times, reported disruptions. CNN broke into programing with descriptions of its problems.

"Our systems are now working and our Web site is updated," said Jeffrey Schneider, a spokesman at ABC.

Although damage was seen limited to several thousand computers, security analysts said the events showed malicious code writers are accelerating the development of viruses as soon as weaknesses become apparent.

"These guys have gotten a lot faster ... they are doing it faster than managers can keep up with," said F-Secure virus researcher Ero Carrera.

That sets up a race between technology managers who must update their systems and virus writers aiming to exploit holes before they are "patched" to fix a vulnerability.

More http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2005-08-17T200311Z_01_HO683966_RTRIDST_0_TECH-VIRUS-DC.XML

[FastLearner]

Hi Waltky. Normally I try to remain quiet and not get involved in any sort of arguments, but since this is not an argument, but rather a discussion, I figured I could step in.

First let me say that my opinions are in no way tied to the fact that PrntRhd is a Moderator of the site since as we are all aware, moderators are people too and are allowed to make mistakes. But...

I am an undergraduate student of the University of Phoenix Online (have been since 2001) and I am about to graduate. As you can imagine, much of my studies has required that I gather information from resources that are found on the Internet. I can say with certainty that if I had just quoted an article and did not give full credit to the other (as you have done), then I would probably be expelled from school. I can also say that using the hyperlink <a href thislink.com>here</a> or even the bbcode that hides links could really get me into serious trouble, as well.

So while we are at it, let's ponder this question:

what is the proper way to quote, in general?

Well, if the material is copyrighted, as is signified by the code:

© Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved.

Then it's best to just leave the information exactly where it is, or you are risking litigation. The best thing to in this case, would be a post something like this (for example):

Hey readers, check out this cool article I found about viruses at Reuters: www.reuters.com

As soon as you hit the copy/paste buttons of a copyrighted page, then be prepared to pay the price...

If the material is not copyrighted, then technically you should be able to quote the words of the post, but make sure to give the full link, not a hidden "More" link to the source. Also it is mandatory that you mention the full name of the author in your reference, if known, of course.

Also exactly for this purpose we have the [ QUOTE] tags, which you may atype in yourself or access by choosing 'Go Advanced' while typing in your reply and choosing the yellow quote symbol on the edit menu. This will produce this effect, which further distinguishes the fact that the quote did not come from you (or PC Guide):

This is my quote. I am quoting myself. I am using this format because I want to avoid any unnecessary problems with the copyright owner of this text, who is actually myself.

Is this making any sense?

Also please let me go on the record as saying:


And just between us, even if we put all of this legal nonsense aside, you will lose when it comes to arguing with the moderators anyway. This is not a public forum. You have no 'rights' or freedoms here (or in any non-public forum) that is not specifically given to you. It is a forum that is run by a private party (Charles) and moderated by private parties (the moderators). This means that the rules of the outside world technically do not apply in here, but rather the rules that are set forth by Charles or the Moderators.


OK? ...:):)

[ErnieK]

When I post info direct from another I always put it inot he [quote] marks. I also post the complete link showing the address (this is usually gets abrieviated when the details are posted to something managble) . This is done for two reasons.

1. out of courtusy for the auther and copyright
2. out of respect for the users in the forum. It lets them see where they are going.

I very rarely click on a BLIND link (like yours) unless I know the individual it came from

[Fruss Tray Ted]

Ernie,
The 'More' link above is not a blind link. My taskbar shows the address when I hover my cursor over it. If your's doesn't just right click it and check properties.

Many people paste partial copies of articles from the various news agencies but in this case Reuters has specifically forbidden the practice with their copyright clause (http://today.reuters.com/Copyright.aspx) so Prntrhd clearly wins here.

Waltky,
You'll just have to be more careful about it and maybe just post the title with a link to the source article with the name of the source business as well. I appreciate your posts but we must follow the copyright rules of others or this site could get into trouble.

IMO, the way you did it is fine but it is not so by Reuters. It would make more sense if they would allow excerpts, only if provided with referrence to the source of the article such as you have done. It would actually act as a bit of advertizing for them if their clause was such. Some do, some don't. 'Que sera' or however it's spelled...

[FastLearner]

Ernie,
The 'More' link above is not a blind link.


Ummm, yes it is... If you are expecting the Status Bar to always reveal the target address, I am surprised you have not gotten infected by CoolWebSearch or any other serious malware yet. With one JavaScript line (self.status = "this link") combined with an HTML <a href>this other web site</a> combination , I can totally send you to a different link than what shows up in the status bar. Just to see how easy it is to manipulate this ststus bar, check out an example page of mine (I have not done the hidden link trick, but you will see how easy it is to manipulate the status bar text - only works with IE):

Just hold your cursor over the Reset button of the form to see what I can do with these few lines of code:
https://garyvogt.sslpowered.com/web420/registration_form.html


self.defaultStatus="Register today and get $20 automatically added to your account!!!";

function changeStatus1() {
self.status="Please check all fields for accuracy and click Submit to be on your way to becoming rich!!!";
}

function changeStatus2() {
self.status="";
}

function changeStatus3() {
self.status="Clicking Reset will erase all the data you have entered so far!!! Use this button wisely...";
}


Note once again that I must stress that I could have made this text whatever I wanted and used it with any type of HTML code I wanted, such as a hyperlink...

Many people paste partial copies of articles from the various news agencies but in this case Reuters has specifically forbidden the practice with their copyright clause (http://today.reuters.com/Copyright.aspx) so Prntrhd clearly wins here.

I agree.

IMO, the way you did it is fine but it is not so by Reuters.

Well, yes and no. The way he did it is clearly not fine by Reuters. The way he did was also not fine by any other standards either, IMHO, since he failed to make any reference to the original author in his post - and he used a hidden link technique.

[FastLearner]

By the way, FTT, I was not trying to pick on you or anything...:)

I am just trying to raise awareness a little bit. You did hit the nail on the head by mentioning the right-click and checking the properties in order to find out where the link is really pointing. The Properties of the link will tell you with 99.99% certainty where you are headed if you click on the link... so whenever you are in doubt, check the properties.

Here's another innocent example, and this requires absolutely no JavaScript programming skills. This link looks like it takes you to spywareinfo.com, but where do you go when you click the link? Right, you go to Yahoo...

http://www.spywareinfo.com (http://www.yahoo.com)

Awareness is key...

[Fruss Tray Ted]

By the way,,, I was not trying to pick on you or anything...
Yeah, right!

Ok. I went to that Gary w-h-a-t-e-v-e-r sight, filled in all the personal info, credit card, birthday, all that jazz, I even tried the loan thing. I asked for a million dollar loan at zero percent interest. When I hit 'compute' it said, "You've got to be kidding!" :eek:

Actually, all seriousness aside, you've gone right over my head,, again. :confused: What I consider a 'blind link' is one that if you hover over it, nothing is portrayed in the taskbar whatsoever. Sometimes it is a Javascript description jargon or it even says it will be a redirect. That IMO is slight of hand or some sort of deception. Sometimes the cursor does not even change from a pointer to a hand icon. I am not using IE right now (probably never will again if I can help it) so I can't say what I'd see with a right click or hover-over.

I'm code illiterate (all of them) but the only savvy I have, I learned here. It'll take a bit more explaining to me as to why a taskbar link that has Reuters in the beginning of the (properties) description to make me suspicious. But of course, I click on the address line in properties and use 'home' and 'end' on my keyboard to read the entire line too. As I said, it's the Javascript and other weird ones I run away from (far, far away)... If it doesn't say exactly where I think it should, I tell the bus driver, "I'll wait for the next one"... :cool:

[pop pop]

I don't know, maybe we are being too hard on waltky.

It sort of looks like sees himself as the Matt Drudge of this site. Drudge got rich and famous just linking stuff that way. But wait, Matt went out and paid for and put together his own site.

Or maybe he wants to approach this forum as kind of a second coming of Slashdot--post a news bit and/or link and see if anybody else out there gives enough of a whit to start a dialog about it.


As my daughter would say, "What-evvvverr." :rolleyes:

[PrntRhd]

I would prefer that forum members treat waltky with respect and that he treat those members here with respect.
Waltky's subsequent posts are now complying with the guidelines, whether he agrees or not with the policy is not material to the substance in those posts.

Like Fast Learner, I do understand the stringent requirements in Academia, but as ixl pointed out in his 2001 thread, the site can be sued so we ask that the attributions be clear, and the moderators will ask for compliance from time to time.
ixl:
http://www.pcguide.com/vb/showthread.php?t=16153

[pop pop]

Fair enough.

[FastLearner]

I don't know, maybe we are being too hard on waltky.


Possibly...:) I don't think any of my replies were directed directly at waltky. However, this issue did raise a couple very important points - awareness and then some more awareness. Just to summarize to future readers of this thread:

1) We need to be aware of when we are stealing copyrighted material. Like I mentioned in my post to waltky, but it also applies to anyone else, if you cut and paste text from a copyrighted page and paste it anywhere else - regardless of whether or not you quote the author - you have broken the law. Period. This is not just in Academia, and this is not limited by limited geographical boundaries. It is international copyright law.

The best (and only) right thing to do is to post a link to the page (and it is also okay in this situation to reword what the author has said to your own words)...

2) We need to be aware that a link's text or the status Bar text do not always reveal the actual target link. When in doubt, right click and look at the link's Properties - with any browser. 'Nuff said.

I see nothing wrong with anyone starting an interesting conversation or discussion. In fact, I encourage it. It's just that in today's world of lawsuits, there is a right way and a wrong way to do so. The penalties for those who do things the wrong way are getting harsher each day, so this was the whole point of this discussion from my end - and not to pick on anyone...:D

[waltky]

See if you can find a posting of mine of an item that doesn't have a link accompanying it.

I can always tell when someone has not read the whole post and noticed either the More, Source or actual URL. Those are the ones who go running off their mouth before they've read to the end of the post.

It is not my problem that others do not know how to encapsulate a URL in HTML code. If I had to learn how, so can others. Maybe then the experience will help them be better net surfers and news posters.

(Well foo!, I just tried to post the procedure in a three step process but all it did was bold the word More.) :confused:

[Budfred]

waltky,

I think you are missing the point... Taking an antagonistic tone is also not likely to be helpful...

Hopefully you now understand what you are being asked to do if you want to post about various issues in this forum... I suggest you do that and work on connecting with people rather than accusing people of "running off their mouth"...

It would certainly help if you stated your opinions about the things you are posting so that people get to know you rather than just that you know how to find articles... There is some reason you are choosing these things to post, so say something about that reason...

[sassie05]

Hope you dont mind if I post a question here! When I try to right click a link I do not have an option to view properties. Can you tell me why?? All I get is:
Open link
Open link in new window
Save target as
Print target
Copy (which is not available)
Copy shortcut
Add bookmark

I am running WinXP Home

BTW thanks for all the info on cutting and pasting copyrighted materials!

[FastLearner]

Hi waltky. I did not mean to single you out or point fingers or anything of the sort. I am sorry you feel like I was "running off at the mouth". This is your opinion, and we are all entitled to share our opinion.

But I cannot sit back and allow you to continue to miss the point, which is not in any way my personal opinion. It is the law ...

Call it my duty from above to inform you and anyone else reading this post, if you'd like. In return, a simple acknowledgement that you at least understand what I am saying, rather than taking offense and trying to start a flame war would be a more appropriate response (this is me sharing my opinion).

So once again, my point is:

Adding a link to your posts is not enough. You can add links all day long if you want to your posts, but you have copied copyrighted material and posted it in this forum, and in doing so you have broken the law. Period.

No amount of name calling is going to change this fact.

Furthermore, and sorry if this sounds in any way hostile, I am curious as to the point of your posts to begin with. We are all more than capable of firing up our browsers and finding and reading the news on our own. We do not need someone to directly copy and paste the news in here (especially if it is copyrighted!). If you would like to start conversation, perhaps the chat room may be more to your liking. Or if you prefer the forums for your posts, also fine... Maybe adding some of your own opinions to your posts would help, and then we can discuss these issues at least...

Once again, I am not interested in having a war of words with you or anyone else. I only asked that you quit breaking the law and risking litigation aimed at yourself or at the PC Guide. Nothing more, nothing less...

Sassie05, hello and sorry you had to read through that to get to the info you are looking for. Which browser are you using? To be completely honest, I cannot imagine why the option to view the link properties is not showing up...

Does anyone else have an idea on this, perhaps a setting in IE or Firefox?

[sassie05]

Sorry I did not include that info. I am using a "SBC Yahoo browser" that needs to use IE 6. OK I am at my Mother's computer and the option to view properties is available here. So, I will check on this at home!

[Budfred]

sassie05,

Your description of what you can see suggests that you may not be actually Right clicking on the link, but rather on the page...

Even if you are gaining access through one browser, you should be able to use another and you might want to give FireFox a try for that purpose...

[hockey man]

sassie05, with firefox when I put the mouse "pointer" over the link, the page the link goes to is displayed at the bottom of the firefox window.

[sassie05]

ok I will do that as I do have firefox.
Thanks

[sassie05]

Thanks guys!! Yup when I use IE or Firefox there is no problem only when I use the SBC Yahoo Browser!! Hmmmmm!
Thanks again! ;)