Quarter byte squaw?

Posted by   Virus Bulletin on   Jul 1, 2002

Worryingly, many sysadmins seemed unaware both of the Apache 'chunked encoding' bug and of their systems' vulnerability...

This month has seen the elevation of what was thought merely to have been a minor DoS on a limited set of platforms running Apache to a remote-shell exploit on a large number. Worryingly, many sysadmins seem unaware both of the 'chunked encoding' bug and of their systems' vulnerability: a quick search demonstrated that at least three major AV vendors are (at the time of writing) running older versions of Apache that are potentially at risk. Modification of executables to contain malicious code, defaced websites, and red-faced sysadmins seem likely to become the order of the day

Posted on 01 July 2002 by Virus Bulletin

 Tags

twitter.png
fb.png
linkedin.png
googleplus.png
reddit.png

 

Latest posts:

NCSC gives important advice on lateral movement

The UK's National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) has provided helpful and practical advice on preventing and detecting lateral movement by an attacker within a network.

What kind of people attend Virus Bulletin conferences?

If you are considering submitting a proposal for a talk to VB2018 and you're not familiar with the event, you may find it useful to know what kind of people attend the conference.

Olympic Games target of malware, again

An unattributed malware attack has disrupted some computer systems of the 2018 Winter Olympics. In 1994, a computer virus also targeted the Winter Olympics.

There are lessons to be learned from government websites serving cryptocurrency miners

Thousands of websites, including many sites of government organisations in the UK, the US and Sweden, were recently found to have been serving a cryptocurrency miner. More interesting than the incident itself, though, are the lessons that can be…

We need to continue the debate on the ethics and perils of publishing security research

An article by security researcher Collin Anderson reopens the debate on whether publishing threat analyses is always in the public interest.