RE: Get your computer viruses here!

["Randy Abrams" <abrams () eset com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: funsec-bounces () linuxbox org 
> [mailto:funsec-bounces () linuxbox org] On Behalf Of val smith
> Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 12:24 PM
> To: Blue Boar
> Cc: funsec () linuxbox org
> Subject: Re: [funsec] Get your computer viruses here!
>
> So my slight disagreement there is that its beneficial in the 
> sense that security people can learn from it.

Cool, nothing wrong with providing samples to vetted security professionals.

> We wouldnt have 
> techniques like binary diffing or call graph comparison / 
> analysis if it wasnt for malware. And those methods are 
> useful for much more than malware.

What? Of course we would have those techniques. Binary diffing has been used
for software release for ages. I'd wager folks were doing this before there
were PCs. Where are you getting this from?

> Also the idea of software protections (packing and encoding) 
> that come  out of malware are useful for copyright protection 
> and other "binary security" needs.

Can you demonstrate any copy-protection scheme actually born from malware?
Theft is what motivated copy protection techniques. Absolutely zero malware
was required to bring this technology to realization.

> Again this is a rather subjective subject (ahah). You could 
> make the analogy that a biological virus has no good uses 
> however we have begun using them for genetic therapies and 
> they have greatly helped us to understand how many other 
> biologic processes work. 

So you are arguing that one should put biological viruses in public places
and tell people that they should only access them if they are good
scientists?

> This whole idea of publically available malware however is a 
> "new" thing and I guess it defies analogy.

The whole idea of publicly available malware is over a decade old. Where
have you been?

 
> I do see the difference between malware and a tool (i hope) 
> but the langauge necessary to talk about this subject is hard 
> and any comparison or anallogy that can be drawn will be flawed. 
>
> Thanks for the perspective though, I will think about it some more.

Good sign.
> V.

Cheers,

Randy Abrams

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.