Antivirus software is mostly useless, hacker says


Recommended Posts

Interesting discussion with a hacker on Reddit. Microsoft Security Essentials is the most preferred and easiest to bypass (according to this guy).

Some screens: http://i.imgur.com/yxMDx.jpg

Highlights:

(R - Reddit / H - Hacker)

R: What anti virus software free/paid for presents to you the biggest obstacles?

H: Kaspersky was the most challenging at first, Kaspersky is paranoid as f...k! But it has an exploit in KIS, KAV and PURE, allowing to start malicious code in the memory context of a trusted system process unnoticed. Kaspersky won't interfere if it thinks it's the system process doing changes to the system.

R: What advice can you give to us "average" folk on how to stay secure online?

H: If the attachment is ending in .exe and pretending to be something else, it's malware for sure. If it's a .pdf it can only infect you if you haven't patched your Adobe Reader (Is now done automaticly). Cybercriminals use 0day exploits only on valueable targets like Iranian power plants or companies with intellectual properties and ****ing lot of cash.

- Facebook friends don't share funny cat pictures on randomly generated domain names.

- If your AV says it's clean or even if Virustotal gives you 0/43 it can still be malware, been there, seen that. Srsly, don't trust your AV.

- Use HBCI or similiar for online banking, it costs 30$ and is military grade cryptography (private key signing), only open source cryptography on signed hardware is 100% secure.

- Windows updates, yes, do them. If you have a pirated copy, just buy that **** or use linux.

- If you are super paranoid, buy a netbook and use a LiveCD or similiar on it whenever you put your CC information in.

- Banking on mobile phone, it's stupid, but atm 'not that dangerous as it seems', because 99% of cybercriminals can't code and there is no (serious) android or iOS malware yet on the market.

R: Does this mean Linux or MAC OSx are impermeable to malware? If so, why? If not, what's the best way Linux or MAC users see if they've been infected?

H: No, but Linux is not targeted, because it is not economical.

R: What do you use to spread?

H: Automatically backdooring warez and uploading it to one click hoster and Usenet. It's funny that even governmental agencies use warez, I found FAA.gov credentials. My momma always said, "A botnet is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're gonna get."

R: why?

H: It first started as a challenge to circumvent AntiVirus systems, but then I realised all AV suck at detection and it's easy to make money with it.

R: how about making a better AV detection system and profiting off that?

H: AV is a completely wrong approach to security. If you need AV to feel secure you already failed.

R: First, thanks for the AMA, really interesting. Could you write some "perfect protection" AV software yourself? I bet you could make a ****ton of cash even if it is a one time sale per person. Is there hacker-folk interest in putting AV companies out of business by giving away or selling cheap, far superior, protection? Would it be more fun to screw over big companies who sell snake oil?

H: Most "hacker-folk" kinda work at AV companies already. There is already a company going the "elimate it at the root" approach: http://www.triumfant.com . But it's not that easy, the big companies have the moneys, Symantec has the colorful commercials, McAfee has the governmental contracts for voting machines AV (Mr. McAfee has btw the same lifestyle as your average Russian Spam King: 66 years old, huge house in a tropical country, 17 year old girlfriend, lots of unregistered weapons lol). It's not about the product itself, it's about power and influence. Read about the "HBGary federal accident" or watch the Defcon 19 video with "Aaron Van Barr (totally not Aaron Barr, because he wasn't allowed to be there :p)". Changing the security industry is like changing the copyright system.

R: you're the reason we can't have nice things.

H: People who can just about start Facebook and put in their credit cards are the reason such things exist. Antivirus companies selling snakeoil and lull consumers into absolute security are another one.

Read more:

http://www.reddit.co...t_operator_ama/

  • Like 2

I kinda disagree. Sure, hackers who know their stuff can get around AV, but I've seen others, as well as experienced myself, when Nod32 catches a virus in an email attachment, thus saving me from ever having to see it in my system. Am I 100% protected? of course not, but just like condoms, and everything else...you can never be 100% safe from anything. I think a reputable (kaspersky/nod32) antivirus app, along with a decent firewall, and a HUGE dose of common sense and logic are your best tools for staying safe from malware/viruses.

  • Like 2

I stopped using antivirus programs a decade ago, just a waste of resources. Never had a virus anyway or any other malware, I don't know how people even get this stuff on their systems. Common sense is the best antivirus.

Yeah,

Like you'd know if you were infected or not if you don't have anything to scan with! Always love it when people say I've never been infected with anything then admit to being dumb enough not to even have any protection!

Whether they're worthless or not, something is better than nothing and if you're worried about resources on todays computers, you shouldn't even own a computer anyway!

  • Like 2

I was using anti-virus on my Mac before I re-installed to run Mountain Lion. And I must admit, everything he's saying is what I've already figured ... I simply don't need Anti-virus. I don't download illegal software, I only download from the Mac App Store or in rare cases, apps such as Skype from the official source. I don't click on ANY links on Facebook. I don't open myself to any scamming because my bank account is locked with a hardware pin device that I need to use to purchase items and use internet banking, and without that device linked to the PIN on my card, it's not possible to do anything with the account. Which can be annoying but is very secure.

So yeah ... I always install AV on friends and family machines because I know they're not going to be as sensible. But when you know enough about what you're doing and you use all legit stuff via secure servers/sources, you really can't fail. Or at least if things did go wrong, they'd be a one in a billion chance.

Boasting about having common sense instead of using antivirus is like boasting about having sex without using a condom. (you never know the stranger you slept with had AIDS or not and same applies to the world of cybersecurity.)

I still use them on Windows - though I am still using XP. When I used windows full time, I used to get a malware pop up being denied about once every 2 months. So I do feel somewhat protected - though better protection is using a sandbox.

On the flip side of the coin. Maybe this hacker is thinking that if reader would believe's the fact that A/V software is useless and decide to stop using A/V thus making the hackers life easier to infect devices....

I was using anti-virus on my Mac before I re-installed to run Mountain Lion. And I must admit, everything he's saying is what I've already figured ... I simply don't need Anti-virus. I don't download illegal software, I only download from the Mac App Store or in rare cases, apps such as Skype from the official source. I don't click on ANY links on Facebook. I don't open myself to any scamming because my bank account is locked with a hardware pin device that I need to use to purchase items and use internet banking, and without that device linked to the PIN on my card, it's not possible to do anything with the account. Which can be annoying but is very secure.

But that wouldn't stop random ad banners from infecting you via some 0day exploit or some other plugin vulnerability.

The site doesn't have to be dodgy in and of itself, but they might not whitelist advertisers as opposed to blacklisting bad ones - or their ad company may not be performing this kind of scrutiny with their advertising clients.

I believe an MMA site called BloodyElbow had an issue in the past, at least one of my friends were able to narrow that site down to one of the most likely candidates. That doesn't mean they are a malicious site, if they were in fact the source then they just had some bad luck with a banner - not their direct fault.

But my point is, you'd call a site trustworthy even if they don't scrutinise every ad banner, and the banners could potentially still infect you.

Boasting about having common sense instead of using antivirus is like boasting about having sex without using a condom. (you never know the stranger you slept with had AIDS or not and same applies to the world of cybersecurity.)

That's absolute rubbish. Having common sense is like having sex with a girl you've been married to for years. She may go places you don't know but you can be more sure that she's not screwing around ... so you don't wear a condom.

Going to warez sites, bit torrent, and other places like that, or opening EXE files which say they're music files is the equivalent of screwing a hooker unprotected. That's the difference.

That's absolute rubbish. Having common sense is like having sex with a girl you've been married to for years. She may go places you don't know but you can be more sure that she's not screwing around ... so you don't wear a condom.

Going to warez sites, bit torrent, and other places like that, or opening EXE files which say they're music files is the equivalent of screwing a hooker unprotected. That's the difference.

Please try to read it again. I said strangers and not girlfriends. And stranger refers to the random usb drive or a website site you happen to be on by mistake or on purpose.

I must say I am losing faith in MSE lately, after seeing multiple viruses just disable it like nothing on some computer's I've cleaned.

I cleaned a rogue program and a rootkit off my grandfather's PC yesterday (The malware was S.M.A.R.T. Check, Tells you your drive is failing and tried to get you to pay for it. It also tries to simulate data loss by setting all your files and shortcuts to hidden. It totally disabled MSE and I ended up having to re-install it after I removed all the malware) MSE is a nice program, and from the av tests I've seen it has fine detection rates, but it seems to have really poor protection vs viruses disabling/removing it which is making me consider recommending other av's over it.

It also seems like a/v's in general aren't too great at detecting the "new wave" of malware these days (mostly rogue programs/trojans/rootkits). So many times, I've seen various a/v programs not block/detect these at all. Apps like malwarebytes have much more reliable detection/removal of these types of infections.

Not using an AV and claiming common sense is hypocritical.

Sure, avoid warez sites, email attachments, and other obvious things, but what happens if you visit a trusted site that was infected/hijacked ?

Common sense is to have an AV 'AND' avoid known sources for getting infected, the excuse of claiming it to be a waste of resources expired when your P133 was binned. Seriously, with 4-16GB RAM and Dual-Oct core CPUs, how can it waste resources ?

I must say I am losing faith in MSE lately, after seeing multiple viruses just disable it like nothing on some computer's I've cleaned.

I cleaned a rogue program and a rootkit off my grandfather's PC yesterday (The malware was S.M.A.R.T. Check, Tells you your drive is failing and tried to get you to pay for it. It also tries to simulate data loss by setting all your files and shortcuts to hidden. It totally disabled MSE and I ended up having to re-install it after I removed all the malware) MSE is a nice program, and from the av tests I've seen it has fine detection rates, but it seems to have really poor protection vs viruses disabling/removing it which is making me consider recommending other av's over it.

It also seems like a/v's in general aren't too great at detecting the "new wave" of malware these days (mostly rogue programs/trojans/rootkits). So many times, I've seen various a/v programs not block/detect these at all. Apps like malwarebytes have much more reliable detection/removal of these types of infections.

That data loss malware sounds funny lol, gonna try infect some friends of mine rofl

While I do agree that common sense is one of the best methods for protecting against malware, it's beyond me why someone would go about without AV...let's say something gets past your common sense? or if someone else uses your computer for "urgent" business and ends up going to a site with even the simplest of malware? IMO, better safe than sorry :)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • ImgDrive 2.2.7 by Razvan Serea ImgDrive is a CD/DVD/BD emulator - a tool that allows you to mount optical disc images by simply clicking on them in Windows Explorer. If you have downloaded an ISO image and want to use it without burning it to a blank disc, ImgDrive is the easiest way to do it. ImgDrive features: One-click mounting of iso, cue, nrg, mds/mdf, ccd, isz images Runs on 32-bit and 64-bit Windows versions Mount ape, flac, m4a, wav, wavpack, tta file as AUDIO CD (16-bit/44.1kHz) Mount a folder as DVD/BD Mount images in command line Does not require rebooting after installation Support up to 7 virtual drives at the same time Support multi session disc image (ccd/mds/nrg) A special portable version is available Translated to more than 10 languages Support File Type: .ccd - CloneCD image files .cue - Cue sheets files of ape/flac/m4a/tta/wav/wv/bin .iso - Standard ISO image files .isz - Compressed ISO image files .nrg - Nero image files .mds - Media descriptor image files ImgDrive 2.2.7 changelog: Added command line parameter to set number of drives Added AACS-Auth support for HD DVD Bumped kernel driver version to 2.2.7 Download: ImgDrive 2.2.7 | 692 KB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) Download: ImgDrive Portable 535 KB View: ImgDrive Home Page | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • AnyDesk 9.7.7 by Razvan Serea AnyDesk is a fast remote desktop system and enables users to access their data, images, videos and applications from anywhere and at any time, and also to share it with others. AnyDesk is the first remote desktop software that doesn't require you to think about what you can do. CAD, video editing or simply working comfortably with an office suite for hours are just a few examples. AnyDesk is designed for modern multi-core CPUs. Most of AnyDesk's image processing is done con­currently. This way, AnyDesk can utilize up to 90% of modern CPUs. AnyDesk works across multiple platforms and operating systems: Windows, Linux, Free BSD, Mac OS, iOS and Android. Just 7 megabytes - downloaded in a glimpse, sent via email, or fired up from your USB drive, AnyDesk will turn any desktop into your desktop in se­conds. No administrative privileges or installation needed. AnyDesk 9.7.7 fixes: Fixed an issue that prevented users from creating meetings without an active license Download: AnyDesk 9.7.7 | 8.0 MB (Free for private use, paid upgrade available) Links: AnyDesk Home Page | Other platforms | Release History | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • I used a Pixel 10 Pro XL when it first came out for about 8 months. When I first got it, it was using Google assistant and that was fast, when asking it to call somone etc. Then it automatically switched with some update to Gemini. Doing even the simplist of things like asking it to call someone in my contacts was soooooo slow compared to Google assistant. I guess it had to go out to the cloud to do that? Back on iPhone and while Siri is dumb right now, it does do those simple things, like call someone, set a timer, star the stop watch etc, really fast. That an while I like Google Material Design 3 over iOS 26, they Pixel 10 Pro XL was so slow in comparison to the iPhone 17 Pro I am using.
    • I use Gemini in my rotation of AI clients...that work pays for. It is good at most things, better than copilot for imgage searching and making images, worse at writing vs Claude and way worse at hadling technical issues when it comes to Azure stuff. I also use YT premium and maps. Anything else Google is a pass for me. I have now seen multiple people locked out of their Google accounts for reasons that are just very vauge.
    • Microsoft is building an AI datacenter that "uses less water than a fast food restaurant" by Ivan Jenic Image: Microsoft Microsoft has announced plans to build a new datacenter campus in Pecos, Texas, as the company continues to invest billions in AI infrastructure. The new facility, called project Kilby, will reportedly have a capacity of 2 gigawatts and will be one of the largest single capacity additions in the company’s history. To power the campus, Microsoft signed a 20-year deal with Chevron to supply natural gas from the Permian Basin, America's largest oil field. This deal is set to become the largest collaboration to date between a U.S. oil and gas giant and Big Tech. It’s no secret that Big Tech has often been criticized for exploiting natural resources for its AI developments. Microsoft is trying to mitigate some of that negative consensus by promising to build its own power supply for the new datacenter, independent of the public grid. The Pecos datacenter will be powered by a power plant hub, built by Chevron, with up to 2.5 gigawatts of gas-fired capacity, with potential to scale to up to 5 gigawatts. The facility will include at least seven GE Vernova turbines, with first power potentially coming online as early as late 2027 or early 2028. The power plant hub is part of an approximately $7 billion investment by Chevron, making it one of the largest dedicated energy projects tied to a single datacenter campus in the U.S. Microsoft hasn’t publicly disclosed the amount it’s investing in the new datacenter. Microsoft has also committed to implementing a closed-loop cooling system that will only require an initial water charge to operate. The company said that “the total lifecycle water use of this datacenter is only a fraction of that consumed annually by a typical fast-food restaurant.” What the press release doesn’t mention, however, is how much water the natural gas plant itself will consume, or how a 20-year fossil fuel commitment squares with the company's pledge to be carbon negative by 2030. The construction of the new datacenter should provide over 6,000 construction jobs at peak build-out, and create hundreds of operational job roles once the facility is built. Via: Reuters
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      mnsgroup earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Conversation Starter
      sumytbe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      B4dM1k3 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      DarkWun earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      525
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      199
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      94
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!