Super-powered 'frankenmalware' strains detected in the wild

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/01/25/frankenmalware/

 

"Viruses are accidentally infecting worms on victims’ computers"
Does it mean that an incoming virus infects an already resident worm? Or is there a language issue?

 

Yep, that's what it means, no language issue.
Freaky stuff, literally. From the BitDefender blog;

..."Now, another “practice” has silently emerged: the file infector that accidentally parasites another e-threat. A virus infects executable files; and a worm is an executable file. If the virus reaches a PC already compromised by a worm, the virus will infect the exe files on that PC - including the worm. When the worm spreads, it will carry the virus with it. Although this happens unintentionally, the combined features from both pieces of malware will inflict a lot more damage than the creators of either piece of malware intended.
...Most likely these Frankenmalware, or “malware sandwiches,” take place spontaneously. The virus actually infects by mistake another piece of malware and ends up using its capabilities to spread. Bitdefender’s Antimalware Lab identified no less than 40,000 such malware symbioses out of a sample pool of 10 million files." link

 

http://www.malwarecity.com/blog/virus-infects-worm-by-mistake-1246.html

 

Could they possibly come up with a more over the top headline?
Frankenmalware?

Ten years ago, we already had malware that could fit into several categories. The lines were already disappearing. To make the matter worse, every company had their own definitions for each supposed family. Trojan removers didn't taget adware. Anti-viruses didn't target trojans, etc. The boundaries were between "families" were completely artificial and were obsolete from the start. The only thing categorizing did was cause missed detections.

This "I accidentally created a monster" story boils down to this. If your default-permit security software fails to prevent malware from infecting your system, then fails to protect you a 2nd time, and then fails to detect their actions and the resulting malware produced by their interaction, it's overdue to be replaced. The cost of failure for a security package has been steadily going up for a long time. This has the potential to increase that cost a lot more.

 

What a terrible terrible article.
Sounds like pure FUD to me. Like a really poor horror script.
Its a pity that all these suggestive names were ever used in the first place ;
"worms" , "viruses" , all they do is end up confusing people.

Its only code that is either authorized by a person to run (by fraud ) or nor authorized by a person ( exploit ).
All the other terms just confuse the issue and what an person can do to stop malware.

Fraud can be reduced by a persons awareness of it ; Exploits can be reduced ( in a variety of ways ) but never elimated.
Finally the effects of fraud and exploits both can also be reduced by backups and by your banks fraud/theft policy.

 

Don't they mean updates it?

 

Lovely, we have malware evolving by themselves.

 

Indeed, notice they changed headline to "Virus infects worm by mistake"

edit: Oops!...think I got the articles (El Reg & malwarecity) mixed up there....sorry

 

So many people predicting "the threats of 2012", how many predicted this? Quite interesting.

 

Not poor horror script or nothing it's the same with real life insects and bugs
they casue damage + they carry viruses so Nothing new just a Natural thing happening in Digital World

 

Yes, it really does mimic nature. Pretty cool.

 

This has been happening for ages. Malware attacking other malware eg a Virus/Worm/Trojan attacking another like MS Windows

 

Sure. We've seen malware actually remove other malware so as to stay more hidden. But this isn't malware attacking other malware, it's malware injecting into other malware and actually "combining."

 

"Malware evolution and the Frankenmalware case" : -http://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/2087/malware/malware-evolution-and-the-frankenmalware-case.html-