![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7Ll_oWWlnVk2_FYZgRRZqnr_GV-W22fezboT4v9B1J4ok47X99nUKvtsmLs-t-VPXp7yqcf0Kk0E6Dwh52byAlj2AoY1cFro3KIn5tVT49wTQ9SFp0YZNRM6OhyphenhyphenrYl4_WL5VyQg/s200/ddos_malware_cc_chinese.jpg)
Can you find the differences in this piece of malware compared to
the previous open source one I covered recently? Besides its localization to Chinese there aren't any, and this development clearly demonstrates the dynamics of the malware scene. A common Web 2.0 mentality is that the more people use the service, the better it gets, a mode of thinking we could see applied in the case of open source malware, and
malware as a web service. Once the source code becomes publicly obtainable, it's not just new features and modules that get introduced, but also, the malware starts using the Web as a platform. In fact, some of the most popular open source malware codes are successfully building communities around their open source nature, thus, attracting "malicious innovation" on behalf of third-party coders. Should we therefore make a distinction between a malware author, and a
malware module coder?
No comments:
Post a Comment