![]() |
Discourse on Oompa Loompa "malware" if you haven't been following this (long read) - Printable Version +- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com) +-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Tips and Deals (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3) +--- Thread: Discourse on Oompa Loompa "malware" if you haven't been following this (long read) (/showthread.php?tid=4910) |
Discourse on Oompa Loompa "malware" if you haven't been following this (long read) - GeneL - 02-17-2006 I have found that this author's explanations are usually strongly critical of Apple's software engineers and it seems, to my "inexperienced in these matters" brain, that he has the expertise to justify his positions. Since I don't have the knowledge to intelligently judge what he proposes, I'd like to hear what some of the more knowledgeable forum members have to say about this. Simply responding angrily to what may appear to be criticism of our "beloved" OS will be taken by me as an uniformed knee jerk reaction. This is serious "stuff" and I think it deserves to be considered seriously. That's just my opinion, I could be wrong. ====================================================== X N E W S F R O M R I X S T E P 17 February 2006 'Oompa Loompa' ====================================================== ---------------------------------------- IN THIS ISSUE ---------------------------------------- IFOREWORD [0000] The Unlit Keyboard OOMPA LOOMPA [0100] Intro [0101] Apple & Unix [0102] Microsoft & VMS [0103] NT & Windows [0104] NeXTSTEP & MacOS [0105] OS X & Oompa Loompa [0106] Oompa Loompa & Unix [0107] The Fate of Apple HOMEWORK [FFFF] Oompa Loompa Links ---------------------------------------- IFOREWORD ---------------------------------------- [0000] The Unlit Keyboard Computer science security history is littered with people who have a piss poor attitude towards it. At the end of every day it's those who demonstrate nonchalance who bring everything crashing down on the rest of us. The OS X Oompa Loompa worm has caused little damage and hit only a handful of computers but it's a good demonstration of the possibilities. And it's the first ever worm for OS X. Have a good interim. ---------------------------------------- OOMPA LOOMPA ---------------------------------------- [0100] Intro There are so many instructive things with the OS X Oompa Loompa worm it's not funny. First off, we have a worm that doesn't want root access. Specifically it does not. That's got to be a first. Second, it's able to operate anyhow. Third, it shows incredible ingenuity in finding a way to trojanise a system and spread like a virus. Fourth - and this is most important: it wouldn't have a chance of spreading if Apple hadn't screwed up the Unix they were given on a silver platter. NeXTSTEP wouldn't be vulnerable; Debian wouldn't be vulnerable; neither would Fedora, Red Hat, SuSE, Mandrake, Gentoo, Linspire, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD, AIX, Slackware, or Solaris. Not a one. What do Apple say? 'Don't open attachments.' Sounds a bit like Microsoft anno 2000 doesn't it? Jay Beale, head of Bastille-Linux, says Apple simply don't get it when it comes to security. They haven't audited their code. They respond well to bug reports but at the end of the day neither understand Unix nor like it - and they seem to count on Unix nevertheless saving the day - despite the fact they're openly ruining it. No one's ever tried ruining Unix before - much less dared. If it had to happen, it almost had to be Apple doing it. We have too long trusted in Apple when we knew better. We trusted in them because they inherited the brilliant NeXTSTEP. We felt secure in the knowledge Apple would have over three hundred NeXT engineers under the roof in Cupertino. We forgot to use logic. We forgot to remember there were thousands of Apple engineers already there. We hoped NeXTSTEP (and Unix) would emerge. We knew precious little about Apple then and today we know too much. ---------------------------------------- [0101] Apple & Unix Apple and Unix have always been at odds. When Bell Labs were proliferating the C programming language, Apple were still using the pedagogical tool of Niklas Wirth. Brian Kernighan had come out and explained in all too gory detail why Pascal was a terrible choice for programming language, but that changed nothing in Cupertino. Peeking into the traditional Apple API is bound to give any engineer vertigo, and a lot of this is attributable to Pascal and the rest is attributable to engineers who wanted to use Pascal. Pointers and explicit typecasts and who knows what - it was a real mess. Copland must have been abortive from the beginning. Common sense says you can't work from a standalone 'hardware interface' and hope to create a real operating system. ---------------------------------------- [0102] Microsoft & VMS Bill Gates always had Unix and a lot of internal work has traditionally been done on that platform at Microsoft. Yet when it came time to choose a robust 32-bit OS, Gates didn't take what he already had in house - he contracted externally. Dave Cutler is the legendary creator of VMS, considered one of the most bulletproof operating systems ever in the world - yet when DEC delivered VMS systems, they left them wide open. Basically, VMS systems - like NT systems - have a 'SYSTEM' account, a rough equivalent of the Unix 'root' account with the subtle difference that 'SYSTEM' is rarely used. But what's important is that it is there. DEC delivered their VMS with the SYSTEM account enabled and set to the password 'SYSTEM'. By default. Every copy delivered. It didn't take long for the 'WANKers' in Oz to figure out how to have fun and this is what came up on thousands of NASA screens as another shuttle launch approached. W O R M S A G A I N S T N U C L E A R K I L L E R S _______________________________________________________________ \__ ____________ _____ ________ ____ ____ __ _____/ \ \ \ /\ / / / /\ \ | \ \ | | | | / / / \ \ \ / \ / / / /__\ \ | |\ \ | | | |/ / / \ \ \/ /\ \/ / / ______ \ | | \ \| | | |\ \ / \_\ /__\ /____/ /______\ \____| |__\ | |____| |_\ \_/ \___________________________________________________/ \ / \ Your System Has Been Officically WANKed / \_____________________________________________/ You talk of times of peace for all, and then prepare for war. VMS itself might have been secure, but what did it matter? The good guys left the door unlocked. ---------------------------------------- [0103] NT & Windows As we all know today, NT started as a DEC project called Prism/Emerald. Cutler's source tree to NT was 'C:\Prism'. His project might have been excellent from his own security standpoint, but he had to bring it crosstown to Redmond in the end. Microsoft had a legacy of code that was supposed to run on Windows. They too had started with a standalone system and were now trying to create a real OS out of it. It just doesn't work. Microsoft contracted Dave Cutler and his 'Tribe'. Cutler had to back pedal so as to not alienate all the Windows programs out there. And in so doing probably said goodbye to good security forever. NT and its successors have passed several 'security tests', but in each case - if you bother to read the fine print - all remote access to the computer was ignored. As the testing body wrote, 'we must presume interlopers cannot access the machine'. How good such a test is in today's world I'll let you judge. Cutler has his NTFS file system; it's not the world's easiest to harden and navigate through; but most Windows boxes still use FAT32 which has no security whatsoever. Tonnes of Windows applications are dependent on administrative privileges which is plain nuts. And so forth. What could have been secure was not allowed to become secure because of existing software titles that just had to run. In other words because of money. ---------------------------------------- [0104] NeXTSTEP & MacOS NeXTSTEP suffered a similar fate. Actually it's not so much NeXTSTEP as it is FreeBSD. FreeBSD is the free Berkeley distro under NeXTSTEP and OS X. Of it Linus Torvalds once said that had it been around when he needed it, he would never have started his own OS project. Whatever: it's vanilla POSIX compliant Unix. Apple have made a branch of FreeBSD they call Darwin. There have been compromises in the past - notably in terms of favouring user-friendliness over security - but otherwise they've mostly been relegated to the file system HFS. Over the years we've written a huge number of articles on what is wrong with this file system. Basically it can be summed up in a few issues. - No support for hard links. HFS tries to implement hard links but does a bum job of it. Users cannot edit their multi-linked files as other Unix users can. Adding insult to injury, most legacy Apple users don't know to this day what a hard link is and why it's good. - As a corollary of the above, the NeXTSTEP document controller used in OS X has been rewired and is totally confused. On the 'recent' menu it works correctly, but when saving files it falls to bits. Conflicting ideas brought about by the totally impossible marriage of NeXTSTEP (FreeBSD) and MacOS are at the root of it. - Resource forks. Not only are they unheard of in the world of Unix, but they also present serious security issues. Bad code can camouflage itself as benign document files. This goes above and beyond what is capable on Windows. The ability with HFS to ascribe a 'custom icon' to any file gives the interlopers the opening they need. - Added to the above is the fact that cross-platform interoperability with other platforms approaches nil. And today with the reversion in 'Tiger' to corrupting the actual FreeBSD open source code to accommodate these resource fork critters, Apple are at an all-time low. Classic Unix programs like cp and mv are rewritten to see and deal with resource forks. This code is no longer of use to open source. - Even Apple's supposed alternative file system UFS ('Unix file system') is not a true POSIX compliant file system: it rewires resource forks as separate files the system will interpret as such. Files get funky prefixes like '._' and Apple's UFS recognises them as resource forks. UFS isn't a POSIX compliant file system either. ---------------------------------------- [0105] OS X & Oompa Loompa The Oompa Loompa worm would not be possible without Apple's HFS. It uses HFS to lure the user into opening it: the initial package uses a resource fork to hide an innocent icon and HFS to mark the file as having its own customised icon. When it is opened, Oompa Loompa again uses HFS to create a clone of itself. When it sets about finding applications to infect, it transfers their entire executables to its own resource fork and overwrites the original executables with its own payload. When the applications are started up, the additional logic is in place; control is ultimately turned over to the code stored in the worm's resource fork. None of this would be possible without HFS. Ordinary users cannot see resource forks and their default file manager Finder won't even tell them when and where they have resource forks. Apple have a number of recommendations online on how you detect foul play, but they're weak at the very best. All clues a user with Finder can get are 'indirect' - you have to read a lot between the lines and you never get to see anything with the naked eye. OS X applications are hives, and again Apple, in their zeal to be user-friendly, are doing their very best to hide this from users. Control-clicking an application in Finder gets you inside it the hive but it's very tough going. (That's the idea.) Oompa Loompa also makes extensive use of the /tmp directory. As on many Unix platforms, /tmp today is a symbolic link to /private/tmp. But both /tmp and the target /private/tmp are deliberately hidden from view in the Finder. Ordinary users can't get at them, and many don't even know they exist - they never see them. In the file '.hidden' in the root directory both 'private' and 'tmp' - along with a goodly number of very well known Unix directories and files - are listed; when they are listed in this file, Finder will categorically refuse to admit they exist. All told there are approximately 15,000 directories and 80,000 files hidden from ordinary OS X users by their file manager. We basically have a clever worm navigating to areas of the hard drive Apple have done their best to prevent users from accessing - how are these users in such case supposed to defend themselves? ---------------------------------------- [0106] Oompa Loompa & Unix Is it possible to create an 'Oompa Loompa' for vanilla POSIX compliant Unix? Not in the fashion this gem has been created, no. It is theoretically possible another bad piece of code will emerge that finds a way to proliferate on these boxes, but it is not the time nor the place to speculate about that here and now. What we can ascertain is that up until recently both OS X and all other Unix platforms were totally 100% 'virus-free' and that now it's only all the other Unix platforms which still are. There was no reason for this to happen. There are explanations, but there are no excuses. And all the blame has to fall on Apple. The fear is Apple will prove to find it just as hard to 'get it' as Microsoft once did and that the commercialisation of NeXTSTEP, setting aside security concerns in the name of an inane level of supposed 'user-friendliness' - just as with Windows - will inevitably result in the same type of catastrophe. It's no fun to use a platform the vendor's left wide open. That's why we left Windows. And there were things about Windows which were cool. Likewise with OS X: the development environment is in a class of its own, but there are more important things down the line. If Apple cannot grab the rudder and make some long overdue changes, we and a lot of others will be 'out of here'. ---------------------------------------- [0107] The Fate of Apple Had Apple stuck to the NeXTSTEP they bought for $429 million, everything would be fine. They would still be using the totally cross-platform FreeBSD which has much in common with every other Unix distro and they would benefit from all the others' research into security and other issues. But Apple have closed themselves out from the Unix open source community. Their Darwin code, their own branch of FreeBSD, is not compatible with FreeBSD or any other Unix platform. They can neither contribute nor benefit from contributions readily available to everyone else. Open source is strong because so many people are working on it simultaneously. When one bug is found in one program on one platform, the discovery (and the fix) can be of benefit to all. Apple still make any number of true open source projects available: Apache isn't rewritten by Apple, as one example. Any number of 'standard' Unix programs are to this day maintained by independent groups and their code is available to all. But at the bottom of all this a good file system must reside, and although Unix has several absolutely 'ace' file systems (Reiser naturally comes to mind) Apple do not use a one of them. They're still locked into legacy 'beige box' compatibility. Just as Microsoft are condemned to ruin their chances with NT. Perhaps it's the commercial angle which does them all in. Open source aficionados would say 'it's not just perhaps' and they're probably right. All open source are trying to do is get good platforms out there; getting the software needed for the platforms is another matter entirely. While commercial organisations like Apple and Microsoft are always thinking of keeping revenues alive - revenues dependent on their 'killer apps' still working. And if that's the way it has to be, it's fairly easy to see that the days of the commercial operating system vendor are numbered. ---------------------------------------- HOMEWORK ---------------------------------------- [FFFF] Oompa Loompa Links The Chocolate Tunnel Oompa Loompa hits OS X. Peeking Inside the Chocolate Tunnel Oompa Loompa hits Apple. Oomp-A: Hardening the Arteries Against the Chocolate OK: so Apple haven't yet put their file system in the trash bin of oblivion where it belongs - what can you do? Xfile 28 February 2003 marked the unveiling of the first 'alpha' release of Xfile, a 'Finder Killer' from Rixstep. It was previewed to select subscribers and on 2 March 2003 was made available to the public. Doomed to the Margins Bill Gates wasn't always the bastard towards Steve Jobs. He once offered the Apple founder some good advice. Become a software company, said Gates. License your operating system to hardware OEMs. Stop playing the proprietary Piper. Nick Nick was taken care of at a very early age by his uncle Steve and aunt Eunice. Uncle Steve worked at Mac and Lisa's boarding house, and aunt Eunice worked in a laboratory far away, but Eunice came back home to help support Nick, and she and uncle Steve combined forces to take care of him. .DS_Store What's the matter with .DS_Store? The idea is good enough; the implementation is not. .DS_Insecure Why belabour an old security advisory? Because it has been Apple's policy to not mention these insidious critters to anyone - even when the online threat was serious. No Dots Much more than a thousand words. Monster Mac users are roaring in rage because of a nasty installment glitch that erases data on external hard drives. The Love Bug - A Retrospect This week marks the fourth anniversary of the Love Bug aka the ILOVEYOU worm, a watershed in the online connected experience. Apple Security Update Apple have plugged the 'protocol hole' after a fortnight - deftly done. The Sudo Hole It's real but... Windows Friendly Attachments Nothing like bashing Microsoft when you're stuck with your thumb in the pie. Zaptastic You've come a long way baby. The Fun's Begun The world's first worm for 'Tiger' in the wild? The OS X Achilles Heel Why are Apple servers so slow? It's not the hardware. Sweet Sixteen It's somebody's birthday today. Phishing Tales Can Come True It can happen to you. Really Super Get File Info People are worried what's on their disks? Why? Bundles A look at OS X application architecture. Hidden Files Ignorance might be bliss, but knowledge is fun. HFS+ Taking a walk in the orchard. 3662262 Back to HFS. Zeroes Are Nice Inside .DS_Store. Yours Mine & Ours Personal computing isn't personal anymore, and the personal computer isn't personal either. Fork-U-2 A site visitor sends a URL, a quote, and a question. Gonna Switch? Reasons why you should - and perhaps should not - migrate to Apple. volfs Putting the horse before the cart: too radical an approach? Yours Mine & Ours II When your perimeter breaks and all you've got to defend you is Finder, you've really got no defence at all. iPod Therefore iPay Something is really missing here. Is It Unix? What will MDM say? Mac Worm X 'Hi! I found this great Dashboard widget! Try it out!' Spotlight on Spotlight A brief look at Apple's new search technology. Disable Tiger Features It's great stuff! OK, now let's turn it off. A Third Chance Don't blow it again. A Weird Bug As so often before, when a 'quirk' rears its head in the futuristic world of Apple's reincarnation of NeXTSTEP, old MacOS and the Maccies lurk around the corner. File Management Macintosh Style Sometimes it's easier to just cross the street. Why Pascal is Not My Favorite Programming Language Reproduced in its entirety. 4350557 When unacceptable behaviour is accepted. OS X Server 'Thank you for buying what is supposed to be small enterprise level software - now, there are some areas of the system you really shouldn't have access to.' Business & Freak What did they see? You cannot save this document The day Linux gives the Mac diagnostic that you can't open a file because you don't have the application is the day Linux becomes non-Unix. ---------------------------------------- This is almost certainly the year of the OS X exploit. The OS X platform may be based on a Unix platform, but Apple seems to be making mistakes that Unix made - and corrected - long ago. - Jay Beale, Bastille-Linux Seymour Quotes Red Hat Diaries Trouble in Paradise Zeitgeists ====================================================== Copyright © Radsoft. All rights reserved. Copyright © Rixstep. All rights reserved. Online Subscribe and unsubscribe ====================================================== X N E W S - W I L L - R E T U R N ====================================================== Re: Discource on Oompa Loompa "malware" if you haven't been following this (long read) - bangman - 02-17-2006 I think you mean discourse. Re: Discourse on Oompa Loompa "malware" if you haven't been following this (long read) - GeneL - 02-17-2006 Thanks bangman. Immediately corrected ![]() I tke prde im me spolling Re: Discourse on Oompa Loompa "malware" if you haven't been following this (long read) - Sam3 - 02-19-2006 After reading the post, they make a very logical presentation based on my limited programming experience and knowledge of computer workings. I would like to hear a rebuttal from an Apple insider, at the same technical level, as to where the article goes wrong. Reading some of the other articles linked, they sure do take apart Mac OS X. If I understand correctly with each new OS update, and Tiger being the worst, Mac OS X is straying from the safe Unix roots and will become a malware and virus infested OS just like Microsoft. All to keep pace with the Mac Classic UI and the 'user experience.' If what they say is true, then I would hope that 10.5 should abandon resource forks and other Mac Classic OS workings to return to a truer Unix underpining, as well as dump HFS. Why not! Since Classic OS won't even run on an IntelMac, let's jettison all the legacy stuff. The last thing Apple needs is all the Windows fanboys saying "I told you so, Macs gets viruses too." Re: Discourse on Oompa Loompa "malware" if you haven't been following this (long read) - GeneL - 02-19-2006 Sam3, thanks for your comments. I was glad to get at least one well considered response. I felt as you do after reading the information that I posted here and like you, I don't have sufficient knowledge to judge the quality of the author's premise. If he is correct, then it is important to heed the warnings. Here's another interesting discussion about this topic. The discussion includes some seemingly knowledgeable members who mostly seem to pooh, pooh the danger by saying that this piece of malware is poorly written. My take is, that while this threat may not be a very big problem, it doesn't take much imagination to envision a more sophisticated "rat" producing a more serious piece of malware that takes advantage of the supposed security flaws in the Tiger OS. I feel we have to do what we can to stay on top of this. As I always say "That's just my opinion, I could be wrong." |