iPack Exploit Kit Bites Windows Users

[leofelix]

Via (Image credits as well)

Not long ago, there were only a handful of serious so-called “exploit packs,” crimeware packages that make it easy for hackers to booby-trap Web sites with code that installs malicious software.

These days, however, it seems like we’re hearing about a new custom exploit kit every week. Part of the reason for this may be that more enterprising hackers are seeing the moneymaking potential of these offerings, which range from a few hundred dollars per kit to upwards of $10,000 per installation — depending on the features and plugins requested.

Take, for example, the iPack crimeware kit, an exploit pack that starts at around $500.

do note: Its name and cute logo aside, iPack has nothing to do with Apple’s products.

You may find more on Malware Intelligence Blog

[Gabethebabe]

All these exploit packs, I´d be interested to know what software it is targeting.

It is quite obvious that it will be exploiting vulnerabilities in OS, browser, Java, Adobe. What other software is popular enough to be targeted in exploit packs? It would be kinda useful to have a list.

[noaccount]

“The program is developed for educational and research purposes. The liability for illegal use of it falls on the shoulders of his employer for these purposes.”

lol


ps - that screenshoot looks website stats to me...

[leofelix]

All these exploit packs, I´d be interested to know what software it is targeting.

It is quite obvious that it will be exploiting vulnerabilities in OS, browser, Java, Adobe. What other software is popular enough to be targeted in exploit packs? It would be kinda useful to have a list.

It would be nice to know I agree.

According top Maifrett FireEye Chief Security Architet and co-founder of eEye Digital Security, Windows is more secure than MacOsx, Mac users are not aware of this issue and undervaluate it


http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20002317-245.html

[hellnoire]

Windows is more secure than MacOsx, Mac users are not aware of this issue and undervaluate it

Oh I'd agree to that... that's for darn sure. When we had a virus on Gnome-Look, that kinda really made people snap-to, and wake up from the dreamworld of Linux being impossible to be uninfected.

[safeguy]

It all depends on how you define security...

MS Windows is "more secure" in the sense that it admits its vulnerabilities and do a job to fix them up and there's a plethora of options to choose from in security products...whereas Apple right now, is still more focused upon it's marketing than security issues.

Apple Mac OSX is "more secure" because of it's market share - yes, it sounds like a cliche and an old argument but that's the fact. It's less prone to attacks as compared to its Windows counterparts (it's the same argument used for Firefox at one point in time)

The geeks are right that Windows is "more secure" than Mac OSX as they focus on the security issues underlying the OS itself.
The home users are right that Mac OSX is "more secure" than Windows as they focus on the security issues that's visible to the naked eye - how it affects their daily work. (come on Windows fanboys - we all know how much effort goes into keeping our machines virus-free currently - just take a look at the amount of forums discussing about it and the paranoia surrounding its many users)

Take your pick and stop saying the other party wrong - each person has his/her own perspectives.

[leofelix]

By the way

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Intego-Finds-New-Mac-OS-X-Malware-HellRTS-140304.shtml

Moreover:the first virus ever developed infected boot sector of Mac floppy discs

[safeguy]

@leofelix

Thanks for that - makes a good reading but I'm definitely not surprised. Macs aren't fool-proof to viruses or Trojans - that has been well etched into my head.

[hellnoire]

Linux's security comes from the fact everyone and anyone can patch a hole... but that same perk is also it's downfall, for who's to say that the patcher doesn't make a new hole in it's place?

That and relative obscurity.