anybody found an av that can remove xml exploit virus?

T

tommy

xml exploit [ aka Exploit:JS/Agent.IHL ]. Announced on Dec 12, 2008 by
Microsoft in their bulletin. Affects Internet Explorer 7, and all other
versions of Internet Explorer. Security hole mentioned in thread "Serious
security flaw found in IE"

It's a bad one, no known anti-virus program can remove it at this writing
[ AFAIK ]. Wiping the disk and reinstalling are the only known cures at this
time.

It is known to inhabit the servers at certain places in youtube and myspace,
anong others.

You can still get it even if you use only good websites, because it can
inject itself across the databases shared by sites.

A friend in the business reports having 7 systems infected in his backlog,
and a shop nearby has overflow of 12 or so. [ Houston, Tx Northside] thurs
, 12/18/08

anybody see it yet in your area? [ haven't seen it mentioned by name in this
group since 12 /17]
 
T

tommy

David H. Lipman said:
From: "tommy" <[email protected]>


| xml exploit [ aka Exploit:JS/Agent.IHL ]. Announced on Dec 12, 2008 by
| Microsoft in their bulletin. Affects Internet Explorer 7, and all other
| versions of Internet Explorer. Security hole mentioned in thread "Serious
| security flaw found in IE"

| It's a bad one, no known anti-virus program can remove it at this writing
| [ AFAIK ]. Wiping the disk and reinstalling are the only known cures at this
| time.

| It is known to inhabit the servers at certain places in youtube and myspace,
| anong others.

| You can still get it even if you use only good websites, because it can
| inject itself across the databases shared by sites.

| A friend in the business reports having 7 systems infected in his backlog,
| and a shop nearby has overflow of 12 or so. [ Houston, Tx Northside] thurs
| , 12/18/08

| anybody see it yet in your area? [ haven't seen it mentioned by name in this
| group since 12 /17]
| --
| Tommy


Exploits are NOT viruses. They exploit code. Antivirus applications can block
eploitation attempts or remoce exploit code.

Since we are talking about explotation of IE, the code is resident upon a web page and
chances are there is NOTHING latent on the PC to remove. If the exploitation code was
successful prior to the HotFix and the code was not recognized by a particular AV
solution, it is too late. The objective is to patch IE ASAP and get a sample of the
exploit code to the AV vendor so they may generate signatures for it. One way to do this
is submit the exploit code directly to the vendor and another is to submit a sample to
Virus Total.

You said... "It's a bad one, no known anti-virus program can remove it at this writing".
You must understand that that this exploit is server based and there is nothing to remove.
If the exploit was succesful, ou are dealing with the payload of the exploitation not the
exploit.
I stand corrected. I didn't know what to call it. It was passed along to me
with not too many details. I haven't heard of the name of the virus
[payload] that they have found. They claim they have used all known av
scans, and haven't been able to restore the machines. [ and are reinstalling
all the software on them] I will report back after getting some more details
if possible.

I apologize for my imprecise language and thank you for pointing this out to
me.
I will also pass along your remarks, but do not expect that they have the
payload as they report nothing from av scanning. There must be damage
otherwise they would have no need to reformat and reinstall.

I'm still wondering if anybody else has seen this on a.c.a.v

Thanks for your comments.
 
V

VanguardLH

tommy said:
xml exploit [ aka Exploit:JS/Agent.IHL ]. Announced on Dec 12, 2008 by
Microsoft in their bulletin. Affects Internet Explorer 7, and all other
versions of Internet Explorer. Security hole mentioned in thread "Serious
security flaw found in IE"

It's a bad one, no known anti-virus program can remove it at this writing
[ AFAIK ]. Wiping the disk and reinstalling are the only known cures at this
time.

It is known to inhabit the servers at certain places in youtube and myspace,
anong others.

You can still get it even if you use only good websites, because it can
inject itself across the databases shared by sites.

A friend in the business reports having 7 systems infected in his backlog,
and a shop nearby has overflow of 12 or so. [ Houston, Tx Northside] thurs
, 12/18/08

anybody see it yet in your area? [ haven't seen it mentioned by name in this
group since 12 /17]

Well, you could:

- Use GeSWall, a policy enforcer and which runs the web browser within
an isolated environment more restrictive than using just an LUA token.
Alas, there are times when GeSWall can get in your way and apparently it
won't let you run Java applets (not Javascript but Java).

- Use DropMyRights or SysInternals psexec to run the web browser under a
LUA (Limited User Account) token to restrict its privileges, like not
being able to install software. However, these only use the LUA token
on the instances of the web browser that they load, not on other
instances of the web browser that are started as child processes by
other programs, like your e-mail client (when you click on a URL in an
e-mail). Of course, having to do this only applies to those users that
insist on logging under an admin-level Windows account rather than using
a limited/standard account. If you use Vista with IE7, and if you left
UAC enabled (so IE7 runs in its protected mode), the limitations of LUA
and more are already applied. These may not prevent the exploit from
occurring but limits the privileges of the malicious code that it
attempts to run as the payload. LUA mode or IE7 protected mode will
mitigate the effectiveness of the malware payload of the exploit.

- MS08-078 lists 8 methods of blocking the attack until you decide to
finally get around to applying the update.

- Go to Windows Update site and obtain the MS08-078 security update that
was available there as of yesterday (Dec 18). See:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS08-078.msp
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/960714

So do you really have access to the *servers* in which the exploit code
was deposited (that would then affect your visit to that site)? The
*exploit* in the web browser means that it might run *code* on your host
that would've otherwise been limited by the Javascript engine
incorporate to the web browser. "The vulnerability could allow remote
code execution if a user views a specially crafted Web page using
Internet Explorer." The payload of the malicious code that might get
executed on your host is not the exploit itself, so your antivirus
program will have to detect whatever is that payload to neuter it.
Again, this is a client-side exploit in the web browser, not something
to fix on the server other than to remedy the corrupted web pages.
Servers are not where end users are using web browsers. This is a web
browser (client) exploit, not a problem with the web server software
running on the server host. There's nothing to fix in the web server
other than repair/restore the code in their web pages (it is not an app
issue on the server but a content issue). It's a client-side problem.
Of course, some admins do use their server hosts as clients and browse
from there (which is dumb).

For the servers, probably the easiest way to cleanup would be to restore
their web pages or databases from their backups rather than dig through
them to find where the exploit code got inserted. They'll have to
discover what was the infection vector into their server host to plug
the hole and prevent reinfection, like SQL injection attacks that
attempt to propagate the malicious code across sites via shared
databases (this is a different attack and not specifically related to
this client-side only exploit).

http://msevents.microsoft.com/CUI/W...lture=en-US&EventID=1032399454&CountryCode=US
http://blogs.technet.com/msrc/archive/2008/12/17/ms08-078-released.aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/961051.mspx

Your antivirus software will have to detect the payload that got
delivered due to the exploit. The exploit itself must be remedied
within the web browser. It's not the exploit that your antivirus has to
detect or repair. It's the exploit's payload and that can vary at every
infected web site. The primary sites that incorporate (perhaps
deliberately) this exploitive code are pornographic sites. Well, I
guess you get what you deserve. Unsafe hex also has its STDs. So
although the bad code is on the site, don't expect them all to actually
do any cleanup. Some of them really want to utilize that exploit by
their visitors that have chosen not to update their web browser. In
fact, after every monthly update that includes fixes to IE there are
lots of malicious sites and HTML-formatted e-mails that try to take
advantage of those bugs knowing that many users procrastinate on doing
Windows updates.

Removing the exploit means you go to the Windows Update site and getting
the update. Handling the [viral] payload of the exploit is up to your
anti-virus, anti-malware, and HIPS programs to handle.
 
T

tommy

VanguardLH said:
tommy said:
xml exploit [ aka Exploit:JS/Agent.IHL ]. Announced on Dec 12, 2008 by
Microsoft in their bulletin. Affects Internet Explorer 7, and all other
versions of Internet Explorer. Security hole mentioned in thread "Serious
security flaw found in IE"

It's a bad one, no known anti-virus program can remove it at this writing
[ AFAIK ]. Wiping the disk and reinstalling are the only known cures at this
time.

It is known to inhabit the servers at certain places in youtube and myspace,
anong others.

You can still get it even if you use only good websites, because it can
inject itself across the databases shared by sites.

A friend in the business reports having 7 systems infected in his backlog,
and a shop nearby has overflow of 12 or so. [ Houston, Tx Northside] thurs
, 12/18/08

anybody see it yet in your area? [ haven't seen it mentioned by name in this
group since 12 /17]

Well, you could:

- Use GeSWall, a policy enforcer and which runs the web browser within
an isolated environment more restrictive than using just an LUA token.
Alas, there are times when GeSWall can get in your way and apparently it
won't let you run Java applets (not Javascript but Java).

- Use DropMyRights or SysInternals psexec to run the web browser under a
LUA (Limited User Account) token to restrict its privileges, like not
being able to install software. However, these only use the LUA token
on the instances of the web browser that they load, not on other
instances of the web browser that are started as child processes by
other programs, like your e-mail client (when you click on a URL in an
e-mail). Of course, having to do this only applies to those users that
insist on logging under an admin-level Windows account rather than using
a limited/standard account. If you use Vista with IE7, and if you left
UAC enabled (so IE7 runs in its protected mode), the limitations of LUA
and more are already applied. These may not prevent the exploit from
occurring but limits the privileges of the malicious code that it
attempts to run as the payload. LUA mode or IE7 protected mode will
mitigate the effectiveness of the malware payload of the exploit.

- MS08-078 lists 8 methods of blocking the attack until you decide to
finally get around to applying the update.

- Go to Windows Update site and obtain the MS08-078 security update that
was available there as of yesterday (Dec 18). See:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS08-078.msp
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/960714

So do you really have access to the *servers* in which the exploit code
was deposited (that would then affect your visit to that site)? The
*exploit* in the web browser means that it might run *code* on your host
that would've otherwise been limited by the Javascript engine
incorporate to the web browser. "The vulnerability could allow remote
code execution if a user views a specially crafted Web page using
Internet Explorer." The payload of the malicious code that might get
executed on your host is not the exploit itself, so your antivirus
program will have to detect whatever is that payload to neuter it.
Again, this is a client-side exploit in the web browser, not something
to fix on the server other than to remedy the corrupted web pages.
Servers are not where end users are using web browsers. This is a web
browser (client) exploit, not a problem with the web server software
running on the server host. There's nothing to fix in the web server
other than repair/restore the code in their web pages (it is not an app
issue on the server but a content issue). It's a client-side problem.
Of course, some admins do use their server hosts as clients and browse
from there (which is dumb).

For the servers, probably the easiest way to cleanup would be to restore
their web pages or databases from their backups rather than dig through
them to find where the exploit code got inserted. They'll have to
discover what was the infection vector into their server host to plug
the hole and prevent reinfection, like SQL injection attacks that
attempt to propagate the malicious code across sites via shared
databases (this is a different attack and not specifically related to
this client-side only exploit).

http://msevents.microsoft.com/CUI/WebCastEventDetails.aspx?culture=en-US&Eve
ntID=1032399454&CountryCode=US
http://blogs.technet.com/msrc/archive/2008/12/17/ms08-078-released.aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/961051.mspx

Your antivirus software will have to detect the payload that got
delivered due to the exploit. The exploit itself must be remedied
within the web browser. It's not the exploit that your antivirus has to
detect or repair. It's the exploit's payload and that can vary at every
infected web site. The primary sites that incorporate (perhaps
deliberately) this exploitive code are pornographic sites. Well, I
guess you get what you deserve. Unsafe hex also has its STDs. So
although the bad code is on the site, don't expect them all to actually
do any cleanup. Some of them really want to utilize that exploit by
their visitors that have chosen not to update their web browser. In
fact, after every monthly update that includes fixes to IE there are
lots of malicious sites and HTML-formatted e-mails that try to take
advantage of those bugs knowing that many users procrastinate on doing
Windows updates.

Removing the exploit means you go to the Windows Update site and getting
the update. Handling the [viral] payload of the exploit is up to your
anti-virus, anti-malware, and HIPS programs to handle.

Useful suggestions, yes, but..you're talking about preventative measures,
and I was wondering about any case reports.

Repair case reports, symptoms [ like you said, depend on payload of course]:
The systems I'm referring to all came in about the time of the exploit, 12th
to 14th, cannot boot, and after MBR restores and repair installs , still
cannot boot. The drives can be read and data salvaged,. Must reformat and
reinstall to use.

Also, the patch just issued is temporary, the permanent hotfix is not
expected until after Jan 1.

Also, YouTube and MySpace have been cleaned and are denying that any big
problem existed, yet thousands infected, MS reports 2 million infected.

ref:
http://www.windowssecrets.com/2008/12/17/02-Microsoft-patches-IE-but-Firefox
-is-still-safer
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top