Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

To All members:This is a true virus warning and not a hoax.
NA | 7/19/2005 | AFCSA

Posted on 07/19/2005 9:45:17 AM PDT by dvan

To All members: This is a true virus warning and not a hoax.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Warning

Emails with pictures of Osama Bin-Laden hanged are being sent and the moment that you open these emails your computer will crash and you will not be able to fix it!!!

This e-mail is being distributed through countries around the globe, but mainly in the US and Israel.

Don't be inconsiderate; send this warning to whomever you know.

Confirmed at: http://www.snopes.com/computer/virus/osama.asp

Origins: There are few headlines that would grab the attention of more computer users around the world than "Osama bin Laden Captured," and that's exactly what whoever created this lure was counting on to snare unsuspecting victims who use Microsoft platforms.

"Osama bin Laden Captured" isn't a virus in itself; it's the text of a message that includes a link to a file called EXPLOIT.EXE. When a message recipient clicks on this link to view what he thinks are pictures of Osama bin Laden's capture, he can end up downloading an executable Trojan known as Backdoor-AZU, BKDR_LARSLP.A, Download.Trojan, TrojanProxy.Win32.Small.b,or Win32.Slarp.< BR> Clicking the embedded link in the "Osama bin Laden Captured" message auto-executes a file called "EXPLOIT.EXE," which exploits a known security hole to download the Trojan. According to McAfee Security:

The Trojan opens a random port on the victim's machine. It sends the Port information to a webpage at IP address 66.139.77.145. The Trojan listens on the open port for instructions and redirects traffic to other IP addresses. Spammers and hackers can take advantage of compromised systems by using the infected computer as a middleman, allowing them to pass information through it and remain anonymous.

Microsoft has made available updates that close the hole exploited by this Trojan.


TOPICS: Computers/Internet
KEYWORDS: ancienthistory; binladen; getavsoftware; getoverit; getpatches; oldoldold; oldvirus; oldwarning; real; reallyold; realold; virus; warning
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-44 next last
To: dvan
Microsoft has made available updates that close the hole exploited by this Trojan.

A year ago ...

21 posted on 07/19/2005 9:56:20 AM PDT by tx_eggman (Does it hurt when they shear your wool off?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dvan

Of course, this virus has been around since April of 2004 and
every anti-virus already knows how to handle it just fine.

Yawn.....


22 posted on 07/19/2005 9:57:35 AM PDT by konaice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cagey

" I don't think a virus can get on your computer simply by opening an email. Isn't it the attachment that has to be opened?"

This used to be true, but some of the new malware is virulent enough that simply opening the email ("emal?") can cause problems.

Good thumb rule, keep your antivirus sware on and fresh (updated).

Cheers,
Top sends


23 posted on 07/19/2005 9:58:42 AM PDT by petro45acp (SUPPORT/BE YOUR LOCAL SHEEPDOG!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cagey

MicroSoft Outlook, and some similar programs, trigger certain applications apon opening an e-mail. THat program can then get infected by a virus.

But that's what this is warning against. There is a link embeeded in the email. If someone clicks on the link, that link will activate the viral program. A common trick is to give names such as "binladen.jpg.exe". MS often chops off the file extension, so the program looks like it is named "binladen.jpg".

The big deal is that .jpg files are harmless; .exe files are programs. Why Microsoft makes it so easy to disguise a .exe file as a .jpg file is beyond me, but you can set your computer to include file extensions always.


24 posted on 07/19/2005 9:59:01 AM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Prime Choice

Make that nearly 2 years old. It was discovered in October 2003.


25 posted on 07/19/2005 10:01:16 AM PDT by steveegg (Real torture is taking a ride with Sen Ted "Swimmer" Kennedy in a 1968 Oldsmobile off a short bridge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cagey
I don't think a virus can get on your computer simply by opening an email. Isn't it the attachment that has to be opened?

Wrong.

Opening an email with Outlook or Outlook express will often launch attachments, scripts, and other programs, depending on the version used, and the knowledge of the Outlook operator, and the defaults chosen for the instalation.

Use of Outlook/OLexpress is the single biggest risk factor for being infected with a virus or a trojan.

People using virtually any other third party mail package (not microsoft) are dramatically safer for this reason alone.

Where have you been for the last 8 years?

26 posted on 07/19/2005 10:02:35 AM PDT by konaice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cagey

In order for you to get the virus you must open the exe file that is attached to the email. It is a cardinal rule that you do not open exe files sent via email. I'm amazed at how many people I meet all the time that use computers often and still don't know that.


27 posted on 07/19/2005 10:08:01 AM PDT by Mcirrus (Future Reference)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: konaice
Where have you been for the last 8 years?

Sitting behind my Norton Anti-Virus shield and I've never had a problem and not once have I opened an attachment from an anonymous emailer.

How bout you?

28 posted on 07/19/2005 10:08:47 AM PDT by Cagey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: dvan

Please post a new messages of every 2 year old virus and trojan to Free Republic hourly. I never get enough of these. Then shoot me.


29 posted on 07/19/2005 10:19:17 AM PDT by elfman2 (This space is intentionally left blank)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: konaice
People using virtually any other third party mail package (not microsoft) are dramatically safer for this reason alone.

I'm old school. I read my email using Pine in a terminal window connected to a Linux server. If I want to see an attachment, I have to save it, copy it over to my desktop computer, and look at it.

30 posted on 07/19/2005 10:20:55 AM PDT by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Cagey
Sitting behind my Norton Anti-Virus shield and I've never had a problem and not once have I opened an attachment from an anonymous emailer.

How bout you?

Using my Linux machines as my web and email stations, and thereby not having to waste 50 percent of my processing power running an anti-virus.

31 posted on 07/19/2005 10:39:43 AM PDT by konaice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: konaice

32 posted on 07/19/2005 11:05:57 AM PDT by Cagey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: dvan

Karl Rove should resign because of this.


33 posted on 07/19/2005 1:04:25 PM PDT by Aeronaut (2 Chronicles 7:14.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg

read later bump


34 posted on 07/19/2005 2:42:02 PM PDT by nutmeg ("We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." - Hillary Clinton 6/28/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prime Choice

"Thanks to Microsoft's shoddy coding in Outlook and Outlook Express, you can indeed get nailed without opening the attachment."

"shoddy coding" ??

Would that mean you accuse the WTC engineers of "shoddy design" also ?

Since this has opening has been closed since the release of Office 2000 SP2, I would suppose anyone still effected by it could be accused of "shoddy computer practices".

http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/esecup/getexe.htm


36 posted on 07/20/2005 8:36:29 AM PDT by RS (Just because they are out to get him, it doesn't mean he's not guilty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RS
Would that mean you accuse the WTC engineers of "shoddy design" also ?

Bad analogy. The WTC designers built their structure to withstand the impact of the largest plane of their day. That was logical.

Microsoft, on the other hand, continually places users at risk by re-implementing the same security vulnerabilities in different ways.

37 posted on 07/20/2005 10:48:50 AM PDT by Prime Choice (Thanks to the Leftists, today's deviants will be tomorrow's oppressed minority.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Prime Choice

"Microsoft, on the other hand, continually places users at risk by re-implementing the same security vulnerabilities in different ways."

... and even if that were true how does that negate the common sense approach of not opening attachments or clicking links from people you don't trust ?

I suppose it must be Mac owners that fill in their credit card info on the spoof e-mails. Since they don't need firewalls, anti-virus, anti-spyware and such they must have a great sense of security.


38 posted on 07/20/2005 12:08:16 PM PDT by RS (Just because they are out to get him, it doesn't mean he's not guilty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Prime Choice

BTW- "Bad analogy. The WTC designers built their structure to withstand the impact of the largest plane of their day."

Not a bad analogy - the 767 and the 707 are very similar in specifications

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian/WTC/WTC_ch1.htm

The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 707-320B is 336,000 pounds.
The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 767-200ER is 395,000 pounds.

The wingspan of a Boeing 707 is 146 feet.
The wingspan of a Boeing 767 is 156 feet.

The length of a Boeing 707 is 153 feet.
The length of a Boeing 767 is 159 feet.

The Boeing 707 could carry 23,000 gallons of fuel.
The Boeing 767 could carry 23,980 gallons of fuel.

The cruise speed of a Boeing 707 is 607 mph = 890 ft/s,
The cruise speed of a Boeing 767 is 530 mph = 777 ft/s.

So, the Boeing 707 and 767 are very similar aircraft, with the main differences being that the 767 is slightly heavier and the 707 is faster.


39 posted on 07/20/2005 12:16:06 PM PDT by RS (Just because they are out to get him, it doesn't mean he's not guilty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: RS
The 767 did not exist in the 1960s when the WTC was designed.

The 767 did not exist in the 1970s when the WTC was built.

It was a poor analogy and it's getting worse by the minute.

40 posted on 07/20/2005 12:52:54 PM PDT by Prime Choice (Thanks to the Leftists, today's deviants will be tomorrow's oppressed minority.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-44 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson