🚀 go-pugleaf

The Symantec web site says that Blaster does not affect NT systems.

http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.blaster.worm.html

however Microsoft says NT4 is affected by the Blaster worm and its variants.
See http://www.microsoft.com/security/incident/blast.asp .

If the two major companies involved can't agree what hope have we got?
Considering this is one of the better known worms I would have thought it be
thoroughly analysed and everyone be in agreement.

It would be nice if the original poster could let us know what type of
system she had and how / why she thought it was the Blaster worm and we may
be able to provide more specific answers instead of arguing amongst
ourselves.

When I applied the Blaster worm patch to my NT4 Workstation I got almost the
same problem the original poster described in that the computer would log me
out after a short period (reboot I think).  I therefore reported my
experience and how I got it working again.

Its interesting that the Blaster worm does not appear to continually reboot
the computer but this is what the poster described as a symptom so I think
she may have some confusion about what has actually happened to the system.
If she would respond with more detail we may be in a position to assist.

Michael


"cquirke (MVP Win9x)" <name.goes.here@nospam.iafrica.com> wrote in message
news:7efdpvgvdfpsvfmuemlj2pkju4bc31lemj@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 15:04:34 +1000, Matthew Kirkcaldie
> >In article <mnnlb.160824$bo1.113551@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
> > "Michael" <mixstatdonotspam@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> >> If you are using NT4 Workstation (not Server) it crashes after patch
823559
> >> and 823980 are installed - you have to uninstall 823559 and rely on
your
> >> firewall to stop the virus.
>
> >> Microsoft no loger support NT4 Worstation so refuse to fix the problem.
>
> >The original poster said he got the Blaster virus previously, and it's
> >specific to Windows 2000 and XP, so he ain't using NT4.
>
> Hmm.  AFAIK NT 4 does share the RPC etc. defects, though not sure
> whether the exploits coded for NT 5.x will work (i.e. infect) or just
> crash the system.  Also not sure that there aren't malware (possibly
> Lovesan variants) that do infect NT 4.
>
> There's a tendency to lump all RPC-exploiters as "Blaster" - though
> the subject line shows a specific awareness of this and includes all
> RPC-exploiters - and some use alternate means of spread.  For example,
> SDbot.RPC.A can be caught on a Win9x via MIRC etc., even though the
> RPC add-on for Win9x doesn't share the same holes as NT's RPC.
>
>
>
> >------------------------- ---- --- -- - -  -    -
>    Kick-Butt Support!  Call us, explain the problem,
>    and we'll pop right over and kick your butt.
> >------------------------- ---- --- -- - -  -    -