Carbon Black assert that if an AV company doesn't detect malware within six days of its being flagged on Virus Total, it probably won't after a month. Is that as dangerous as it sounds?
Last week, reports of a new malware named Gauss emerged, a complex threat that has attracted a lot of media attention due to its links to Stuxnet and Flame and its geographical distribution. Since ESET has added detection for this threat, we are seeing geographical distribution of detection reports similar to those detailed by Kaspersky.
Aleksandr Matrosov looks at the internal architecture of Win32/Flamer's mssecmgr.ocx module.
The slow drip of revelations about Flame have kept this piece of malware in the news for more than two weeks so it is worth reminding people that most antivirus programs now protect against Flame (ESET products detect it as Win32/Flamer.A). The coverage of Flame was boosted last week by a conveniently-timed assist from leaks
A week ago the big malware news was the code known as Flame, Flamer, or sKyWIper (detected by ESET as Win32/Flamer.A), then on June 1, this news broke: "A damaging cyberattack against Iran’s nuclear program was the work of U.S. and Israeli experts and proceeded under the secret orders of President Obama." (Washington Post) Clearly,
How serious can a malicious software infection be these days? Short answer = Very. The video below is a 16 minute answer to that question using pictures of what a malware infection looks like to the bad guy who manages to get a RAT installed on a victim machine. That’s R.A.T. for Remote Access Tool