PC Review
Forums
Newsgroups
Hardware
Anti-Virus
Re: Radio chip barcodes can carry a virus: scientists (Reuters)
Forums
Newsgroups
Hardware
Anti-Virus
Re: Radio chip barcodes can carry a virus: scientists (Reuters)
![]() |
Re: Radio chip barcodes can carry a virus: scientists (Reuters) |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On that special day, Technophobe, (Technophobe.24prhb@no-
mx.forums.yourdomain.com.au) said... > and susceptible > to computer viruses How can something that only *stores* data, become *viral*? I hate people who can't use the *proper* wors, when they are talking about anything. Hey, I've got a pain in my neck, it's probably a flu... Gabriele Neukam Gabriele.Spamfighter.Neukam@t-online.de -- Ah, Information. A property, too valuable these days, to give it away, just so, at no cost. |
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 18:56:57 +0100 Gabriele Neukam wrote:
> On that special day, Technophobe, (Technophobe.24prhb@no- > mx.forums.yourdomain.com.au) said... > > > and susceptible > > to computer viruses > > How can something that only *stores* data, become *viral*? > If the data loaded into the chip is corrupt? -- Ernie B. Communication: The art of moving an idea from one mind to another, hopefully without distortion. |
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
"Gabriele Neukam" <Gabriele.Spamfighter.Neukam@t-online.de> wrote in message news:dv9kh7$lt1$02$1@news.t-online.com... > On that special day, Technophobe, (Technophobe.24prhb@no- > mx.forums.yourdomain.com.au) said... > > > and susceptible > > to computer viruses > > How can something that only *stores* data, become *viral*? How can files, which are stored data, be viral? Data representation is in the eye of the interpreter. If the data is corrupted in such a way as to cause the interpreting software to fail, and this fialure can be leveraged into running code that puts that corrupted data into the next device, you have a virus. When you redefine virus as the AV community has, this would probably be a worm and not simply a virus. |
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Jake Dodd wrote:
> "Gabriele Neukam" <Gabriele.Spamfighter.Neukam@t-online.de> wrote in message news:dv9kh7$lt1$02$1@news.t-online.com... >> On that special day, Technophobe, (Technophobe.24prhb@no- >> mx.forums.yourdomain.com.au) said... >> >>> and susceptible >>> to computer viruses >> How can something that only *stores* data, become *viral*? > > How can files, which are stored data, be viral? > > Data representation is in the eye of the interpreter. If the data is > corrupted in such a way as to cause the interpreting software to > fail, and this fialure can be leveraged into running code that puts > that corrupted data into the next device, you have a virus. > > When you redefine virus as the AV community has, this would > probably be a worm and not simply a virus. having (mostly) read the source material i can probably answer some of these questions... regular rfid tags can hold up to 128 bytes (1024 bits) of data and that data is read by hardware, interpreted by software and generally stored in a database... in the example given an sql injection exploit was used as the rfid data which when inserted into the database caused the self-replicating query to execute... under the formal definition of virus the first example given was a virus, however under the definition the av community uses it was not a virus as it doesn't infect any other programs... that's not to say that one couldn't write an infector, however - something that infects stored procedures for example... and for the record, the requirement for infection comes from fred cohen himself, it's not part of any redefinition by the av industry (though they have tweaked things here and there from his original informal definition)... it's unfortunate, however, that the researchers seem to have chosen to publish their code, otherwise i would have put a link to it on my site... -- "it's not the right time to be sober now the idiots have taken over spreading like a social cancer, is there an answer?" |
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Jake Dodd wrote:
> When you redefine virus as the AV community has, this would > probably be a worm and not simply a virus. Uh, yeah. Point. It will not be a virus until the RFID devices become two way. |
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 09:13:03 -0600, Offbreed wrote
(in article <Cq-dnfidrv2aE4TZRVn-qg@scnresearch.com>): > Jake Dodd wrote: > >> When you redefine virus as the AV community has, this would >> probably be a worm and not simply a virus. > > Uh, yeah. Point. > > It will not be a virus until the RFID devices become two way. I am not sure about that. No it doesn't broadcast but my understanding is that any RFID reader automatically attempts to read any RFID tag in range. And I don't know enough about the code to know if the same tag would affect both say wal-mart and the speed passes at the pumps. If that were true I would call it a virus. Anyway a couple of other issues. 1) The thought used to be ( according to the articles I have seen) that there was not enough room in 128 bytes to put anything malicious on there. What about the magnetic stripes on credit cards and drivers licenses? I don't know their size but I would have to think it is larger than 128 bytes. 2) 128 bytes is just this generation of RFID tags. Does anyone know what the next generation is supposed to have? Hud |
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
"kurt wismer" <kurtw@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:nT2Sf.9021$ng.456270@news20.bellglobal.com... > and for the record, the requirement for infection comes from fred cohen > himself, it's not part of any redefinition by the av industry (though > they have tweaked things here and there from his original informal > definition)... If one modified reader's software program's instance is capable of transmitting the same modification to another instance, doesn't that still fit in with both of Cohen's definitions for virus? I seem to recall no restrictions on just exactly 'how' such modification was accomplished even in the plain language version. |
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
the shadow wrote:
> I am not sure about that. No it doesn't broadcast but my understanding is > that any RFID reader automatically attempts to read any RFID tag in range. > And I don't know enough about the code to know if the same tag would affect > both say wal-mart and the speed passes at the pumps. If that were true I > would call it a virus. I would not call it a virus until it can replicate. I don't think going cross platform or cross program is really relevant. Not for this part. Massive PITA, for sure. > 2) 128 bytes is just this generation of RFID tags. Does anyone know what the > next generation is supposed to have? Bigger. <G> I bet someone could make a transceiver that would mimic an RFID device, and spit out something larger than 128 bytes. The RFID reader would just be the entry device. IIRC, several science fiction stories used devices somewhat like this to defeat electronic security. |
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Jake Dodd wrote:
> "kurt wismer" <kurtw@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:nT2Sf.9021$ng.456270@news20.bellglobal.com... > >> and for the record, the requirement for infection comes from fred cohen >> himself, it's not part of any redefinition by the av industry (though >> they have tweaked things here and there from his original informal >> definition)... > > If one modified reader's software program's instance is capable of transmitting > the same modification to another instance, doesn't that still fit in with both of > Cohen's definitions for virus? the example given in the paper doesn't modify the reader software at all... that said, what you describe does seem like it fits with what is described here (http://all.net/books/virus/part2.html) -- "it's not the right time to be sober now the idiots have taken over spreading like a social cancer, is there an answer?" |
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Offbreed wrote:
> Jake Dodd wrote: > >> When you redefine virus as the AV community has, this would >> probably be a worm and not simply a virus. > > Uh, yeah. Point. > > It will not be a virus until the RFID devices become two way. not true... that functionality is not required for it to be a virus... what is required is that the program infects other host programs... that doesn't have to be on the rfid devices themselves... rfid tags can *carry* viruses (as they're just a wirelessly accessible storage medium), they just can't be infected by them (contrary to the terminology used by the researchers themselves)... -- "it's not the right time to be sober now the idiots have taken over spreading like a social cancer, is there an answer?" |
|
![]() |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Rate This Thread | |
|
|

Main Page 

