Kaspersky Lab Releases File Recovery Instructions For Gpcode.ak Attacks

Status
Not open for further replies.

a 6pack in

Distinguished
Nov 12, 2007
157
0
18,680
[citation][nom]Christopher1[/nom]Does this attack work on Windows Vista http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista ? Or does the included security stop attacks like this in their tracks before they even get started?[/citation]
I LOL'ed at that statement too.

the thought of GPUs being no more.. is totally obsured. considering CUDA. I think that CPUs could be taking a bigger hit, dont ya think?
 

seatrotter

Distinguished
Jun 18, 2008
85
0
18,630
[citation][nom]Christopher1[/nom]Does this attack work on Windows Vista http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista ? Or does the included security stop attacks like this in their tracks before they even get started?[/citation]
The malware targets user files (.doc, .txt, .xls, etc). If you're thinking of something like the UAC, it won't stop it. UAC works on system files/configuration and doesn't protect user files. How about other users' files? Vista won't prompt the user, but will deny the malware (unless it's implemented to bypass user restrictions).

Kaspersky probably already has signature for the caught/detected malware (probably, detected initually as suspicious software). But if the author uses a new kind of packing/encrypting for the malware, throw in some anti-debug and anti-kaspersky mechanism, then the new variation slip right thru.
 

seatrotter

Distinguished
Jun 18, 2008
85
0
18,630
[citation][nom]Christopher1[/nom]Does this attack work on Windows Vista http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista ? Or does the included security stop attacks like this in their tracks before they even get started?[/citation]
The malware targets user files (.doc, .txt, .xls, etc). If you're thinking of something like the UAC, it won't stop it. UAC works on system files/configuration and doesn't protect user files. How about other users' files? Vista won't prompt the user, but will deny the malware (unless it's implemented to bypass user restrictions).

Kaspersky probably already has signature for the caught/detected malware (probably, detected initually as suspicious software). But if the author uses a new kind of packing/encrypting for the malware, throw in some anti-debug and anti-kaspersky mechanism, then the new variation slip right thru.
 

seatrotter

Distinguished
Jun 18, 2008
85
0
18,630
Sorry for the double post. After refreshing several times and not seeing the first post, I thought it didn't go thru. I guess that's TomsH comment system for you :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.