Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Is the Unix Community Worried About Worms? 516

jaliathus asks: "While the Microsoft side of the computer world works overtime these days to fight worms, virii and other popular afflictions of NT, we in the Linux camp shouldn't be resting *too* much. After all, the concept of a worm similar to Code Red or Nimda could just as easily strike Linux ... it's as easy as finding a known hole and writing a program that exploits it, scans for more hosts and repeats. The only thing stopping it these days is Linux's smaller marketshare. (Worm propagation is one of those n squared problems). Especially if our goals of taking over the computing world are realized, Linux can and will be a prime target for the worm writers. What are we doing about it? Of course, admins should always keep up on the latest patches, but can we do anything about worms in the abstract sense?" Dispite the difficulties in starting a worm on a Unix clone, such a feat is still within the realm of possibility. Are there things that the Unix camp can be learning from Code Red and Nimbda?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Is the Unix Community Worried About Worms?

Comments Filter:
  • by Kaz Kylheku ( 1484 ) on Friday September 21, 2001 @03:36PM (#2331400) Homepage
    The UNIX world already had a worm that recursively exploited security holes and spread, back in 1988.

    THAT was the worm to learn from, not Code Red!
  • Monoculture (Score:3, Insightful)

    by fractalus ( 322043 ) on Friday September 21, 2001 @03:37PM (#2331406) Homepage
    Even if Linux gained market dominance, it wouldn't quite be the monoculture that Windows is. There are many distributions of Linux, which put important files in different places. This isn't insurmountable but it does make writing a worm capable of running rampant a wee bit harder.

    Also, it's my experience that (for now) people who set up Linux to run on the net are a little bit more clueful than NT administrators. NT seems to encourage the idea that any moron can run it because it's point and click. This isn't true; it takes more work to effectively admin an NT box than a Linux box.

    There have and will continue to be worms. Worms are most successful at any point of monoculture. (sendmail; bind; IIS) The solution, then, is not dominance... but diversity.
  • by NetJunkie ( 56134 ) <jason DOT nash AT gmail DOT com> on Friday September 21, 2001 @03:56PM (#2331578)
    If someone doesn't patch their Windows systems why would they patch their Linux systems? Doesn't matter if the patch is out 2 seconds after the bug is revealed if the admin doesn't take notice and act.
  • To really make a worm mess people up, it needs to get root access. That fact alone is enough to make Apache more secure than IIS, due to the fact that unless you're an idiot you run your Apache servers as a non-root user.

    For a moment, this didn't ring true. Why? Because the capacity of a local user to utilize a local root exploit (and thus render your argument invalid) is high.

    But then, I realized something. Open Source software encourages diversity. Apache may be running on Windows, Debian GNU/Linux, Redhat, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, etc... etc... And the root exploits are all different. Who are you going to pick on? All of them?

    The worm we're seeing floating around the MS community are exploiting lots of known bugs in one fell swoop. Virtually all Windows installations except those secured by some smart users and some smart admins are vulnerable to one of these attacks. Thus, once again, the Open Source world could have a worm that used a collection of exploits to root many kinds of boxes, right?

    Wrong. The memory footprint and coding skill this would take would make the worm look a lot more like "Microsoft Office for Every Platform" than the Morris Worm. That's because the vulnerabilities taken advantage of are most often in a variety of particular programs rather than some standard API or a few known awful (*cough*Outlook*cough) offenders. If a kernel version or the last few X11 versions had some huge flaws, or maybe Gnome or KDE, then we have a chance to worry. But you know what? The only one of those that Apache is involved in at all is the kernel. Server machines s often do not have X11, let alone Gnome, or KDE.. etc.. etc..

    So my extremely longwinded point is: We aren't immune, but the kind of attack that we're seeing on Windows right now is hard against Open Source Software. Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations.

The nation that controls magnetism controls the universe. -- Chester Gould/Dick Tracy

Working...