Your browser is obsolete!

The page may not load correctly.

Persona (non) grata

Persona (non) grata

Other issues in this category (20)
  • add to favourites
    Add to Bookmarks

WannaCry through the mass media lens

Read: 769 Comments: 3 Rating: 7

The tidal wave of WannaCry "epidemic" news reported by the mass media has raised a logical question: with regards to major companies and organizations getting infected, which anti-virus products have offered the best protection? Such news has interested mass media organizations, which write about topics that are of importance to their readers, and the public relations departments of the various software manufacturers.

WannaCrypt is dangerous because anti-viruses are largely unable to protect computers from it. The fact is that criminals are distributing malware capable of bypassing anti-viruses by exploiting a critical vulnerability in the SMBv1 protocol of the MS17-010 security system.

http://safe.cnews.ru/news/line/2017-05-16_analitiki_driverpack_virus_wannacrypt_vse_eshche

It's senseless even to comment on this news: everyone who read the description of WannaCry knows that the vulnerability is associated exclusively with the method of penetration. And after WannaCry has penetrated a computer, the anti-virus may well detect the files comprising it that have "popped up" in the system.

En testant la capacité des logiciels de protection grand public (avec leurs paramétrages par défaut) à détecter l’exploit EternalBlue, mis à profit par WannaCry pour se diffuser, MRG Effitas établit que seuls trois produits stoppent le code de la NSA récupéré par les auteurs du ransomware: Eset Smart Security, F-Secure Safe et Kaspersky Internet Security.

http://www.silicon.fr/wannacry-seulement-trois-antivirus-protegent-exploit-eternalblue-175315.html

"Only three anti-virus solutions could issue a challenge to WannaCry", says the text above. Only VirusTotal showed different information:

#drweb

#drweb

Trojan.Encoder.11432 (also known as WannaCry) didn’t pose any threat to Dr.Web users from the moment it started spreading since it was detected by heuristic mechanisms before the first sample of the Trojan was added to the Dr.Web virus databases. It was classified as a backdoor (a remote access utility), but nonetheless it was detected and removed.

Why did a free Dr.Web solution provided by Atlant Telecom protect its users from the virus, while other anti-viruses were not able to do so?

A journalist’s question to Doctor Web’s PR service

#encryption_ransomware #Trojan.Encoder #anti-virus #security

Dr.Web recommends

News is nothing more than news. Each information resource tries to be the first to report breaking news, and because of this, a situation often gets only more confusing.

Find reliable news about Trojans on websites belonging to companies that are responsible for the anti-virus security of their users.

Rate this issue and receive Dr.Weblings! (1 vote = 1 Dr.Webling)

Sign in and get 10 Dr.Weblings for sharing the link to this issue via social media.

[Twitter]

Unfortunately, due to Facebook's technical limitations, Dr.Weblings cannot be awarded. However, you can share this link with your friends for free.

Tell us what you think

Leave your comment on the day of publication and get 10 Dr.Weblings, or get 1 Dr.Webling for a comment posted any other day. Comments are published automatically and are reviewed by a moderator. Rules for leaving comments about Doctor Web news items.

To leave a comment, you need to log in under your Doctor Web site account. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one.

Comments