The quick spread of the Sobig.C virus may owe more to the
advances in spamming techniques than to the skill of an anonymous
virus writer, a leading antivirus company claimed.An analysis of e-mail messages containing the
new worm variant by Russian antivirus company Kaspersky Labs
revealed what appears to be a distribution pattern more akin to
spam e-mail than a fast-spreading virus.
Like the original Sobig virus, Sobig.C is a
mass-mailing worm that spreads copies of itself through e-mail
messages with attached files which contain the virus code.
The new variant was first detected late last
Friday and spread quickly across multiple countries in the hours
after it first appeared, according to a statement by Helsinki
security company F-Secure Corp.
"It looks like the virus writer enhanced the
virus's replication with spam technology to achieve greater
spreading speed and global distribution," said Denis Zenkin, head
of Kaspersky.
E-mail that is generated by a worm can
typically be traced back to another infected machine, Zenkin
said.
With the recent Sobig.C virus, however,
Kaspersky researchers found that the machines responsible for
distributing the virus were not infected with Sobig, leading
Kaspersky researchers to theorise that they were "open proxy"
machines used by spammers to conduct massive e-mail distributions,
Zenkin said.
Open proxies are loosely managed machines
connected to the internet and open to trespass by outsiders. They
are often home computers connected to the internet using always-on
DSL (Digital Subscriber Line) or cable modem connections, according
to Mark Sunner, chief technology officer at e-mail security company
MessageLabs.
Without the initial spamming of Sobig.C
e-mail, it is doubtful the virus would have spread as quickly,
Zenkin said.
The virus has features that can grab e-mail
addresses from files stored on infected machines. Lists of
destination addresses for use by spammers are easily available
online and could be used to "seed" the new virus to millions of
machines at once.
Sunner added that there is a "high likelihood"
that Sobig.C used a spam engine to spread. The initial appearance
of Sobig was unusual for viruses, spiking over the weekend and then
quickly dying off.
"It's certainly plausible that the virus
writers may have kick-started replication with spamming
techniques," said Chris Belthoff, senior security analyst at
security firm Sophos.
However, spam is not the only way the virus
spreads. "We're absolutely certain that the virus does replicate.
We have reported cases of the virus replicating," Belthoff
said.
Sophos did not analyse the source of the
Sobig.C e-mail samples it received, but it is not uncommon for
virus writers to launch their creations with massive e-mail
distributions, Belthoff said.
The virus writer may have contracted with a
spammer to distribute the e-mail or taken advantage of an open
proxy that had been left vulnerable by another virus, Zenkin said,
adding that a more likely scenario is that the virus writer is also
an active spammer.
While its initial distribution was unusually
large, the Sobig.C virus outbreak is just the latest example of the
convergence of spam and viruses, with spammers using open proxies
as mini e-mail servers, according to Sunner.
"Sixty per cent of the spam e-mail we get is
coming from open proxies. Spammers are using always-on connections
to give them an almost infinite number of IP addresses to send
their mail from," Sunner said.
This raises the question of whether Sobig.C is
better described as spam or as a virus.
Zenkin said he preferred to talk about Sobig.C
as a virus with two separate spreading techniques: One based in the
virus's worm code and the other being spam distribution technology
used by the author to seed the new virus.
Security experts did agree that computer users
should be ready for a new version of the Sobig virus this
weekend.
The Sobig.C variant is programmed to expire on
8 June and Sobig.C was released on the same day that its
predecessor, Sobig.B, was programmed to stop spreading.
The serial releases may be an effort by the
Sobig author to fool antivirus software by subtly altering the
makeup of the virus. Alternatively, the author could be releasing
"proof of concept" viruses, testing the success of different
viruses depending on when and how they are distributed, according
to Sunner and Belthoff.
Paul Roberts writes for IDG News Service