Hubbry Logo
ConfickerConfickerMain
Open search
Conficker
Community hub
Conficker
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Conficker
Conficker
Conficker
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Conficker
Malware details
Technical name
TypeWorm
Technical details
PlatformsWindows 2000, Windows XP, Windows 2003 Server (SP2), Windows Vista, Windows 2008 Server[1]

Conficker, also known as Downup, Downadup and Kido, is a computer worm targeting the Microsoft Windows operating system that was first detected in November 2008.[2] It uses flaws in Windows OS software (MS08-067 / CVE-2008-4250)[3][4] and dictionary attacks on administrator passwords to propagate while forming a botnet, and has been unusually difficult to counter because of its combined use of many advanced malware techniques.[5][6] The Conficker worm infected millions of computers including government, business and home computers in over 190 countries, making it the largest known computer worm infection since the 2003 SQL Slammer worm.[7]

Despite its wide propagation, the worm did not do much damage, perhaps because its authors – believed to have been Ukrainian citizens – did not dare use it because of the attention it drew.[citation needed] Four men were arrested, and one pled guilty and was sentenced to four years in prison.

Prevalence

[edit]

Estimates of the number of infected computers were difficult because the virus changed its propagation and update strategy from version to version.[8] In January 2009, the estimated number of infected computers ranged from almost 9 million[9][10][11] to 15 million.[12] Microsoft has reported the total number of infected computers detected by its antimalware products has remained steady at around 1.7 million from mid-2010 to mid-2011.[13][14] By mid-2015, the total number of infections had dropped to about 400,000,[15] and it was estimated to be 500,000 in 2019.[16]

History

[edit]

Name

[edit]

The origin of the name Conficker is thought to be a combination of the English term "configure" and the German expletive Ficker (engl. fucker).[17] Microsoft analyst Joshua Phillips gives an alternative interpretation of the name, describing it as a rearrangement of portions of the domain name trafficconverter.biz[18] (with the letter k, not found in the domain name, added as in "trafficker", to avoid a "soft" c sound) which was used by early versions of Conficker to download updates.

Discovery

[edit]

The first variant of Conficker, discovered in early November 2008, propagated through the Internet by exploiting a vulnerability in a network service (MS08-067) on Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows Server 2003, Windows Server 2008, and Windows Server 2008 R2 Beta.[19] While Windows 7 may have been affected by this vulnerability, the Windows 7 Beta was not publicly available until January 2009. Although Microsoft released an emergency out-of-band patch on October 23, 2008, to close the vulnerability,[20] a large number of Windows PCs (estimated at 30%) remained unpatched as late as January 2009.[21] A second variant of the virus, discovered in December 2008, added the ability to propagate over LANs through removable media and network shares.[22] Researchers believe that these were decisive factors in allowing the virus to propagate quickly.

Impact in Europe

[edit]

Intramar, the French Navy computer network, was infected with Conficker on 15 January 2009. The network was subsequently quarantined, forcing aircraft at several airbases to be grounded because their flight plans could not be downloaded.[23]

The United Kingdom Ministry of Defence reported that some of its major systems and desktops were infected. The virus had spread across administrative offices, NavyStar/N* desktops aboard various Royal Navy warships and Royal Navy submarines, and hospitals across the city of Sheffield reported infection of over 800 computers.[24][25]

On 2 February 2009, the Bundeswehr, the unified armed forces of Germany, reported that about one hundred of its computers were infected.[26]

An infection of Manchester City Council's IT system caused an estimated £1.5m worth of disruption in February 2009. The use of USB flash drives was banned, as this was believed to be the vector for the initial infection.[27]

A memo from the Director of the UK Parliamentary ICT service informed the users of the House of Commons on 24 March 2009 that it had been infected with the virus. The memo, which was subsequently leaked, called for users to avoid connecting any unauthorised equipment to the network.[28]

In January 2010, the Greater Manchester Police computer network was infected, leading to its disconnection for three days from the Police National Computer as a precautionary measure; during that time, officers had to ask other forces to run routine checks on vehicles and people.[29]

Operation

[edit]

Although almost all of the advanced malware techniques used by Conficker have seen past use or are well known to researchers, the virus's combined use of so many has made it unusually difficult to eradicate.[30] The virus's unknown authors are also believed to be tracking anti-malware efforts from network operators and law enforcement and have regularly released new variants to close the virus's own vulnerabilities.[31][32]

Five variants of the Conficker virus are known and have been dubbed Conficker A, B, C, D and E. They were discovered 21 November 2008, 29 December 2008, 20 February 2009, 4 March 2009 and 7 April 2009, respectively.[33][34] The Conficker Working Group uses namings of A, B, B++, C, and E for the same variants respectively. This means that (CWG) B++ is equivalent to (MSFT) C and (CWG) C is equivalent to (MSFT) D.

Variant Detection date Infection vectors Update propagation Self-defense End action
Conficker A 2008-11-21
  • NetBIOS
    • Exploits MS08-067 vulnerability in Server service[32]
  • HTTP pull
    • Downloads from trafficconverter.biz
    • Downloads daily from any of 250 pseudorandom domains over 5 TLDs[35]

None

  • Updates self to Conficker B, C or D[36]
Conficker B 2008-12-29
  • NetBIOS
    • Exploits MS08-067 vulnerability in Server service[32]
    • Dictionary attack on ADMIN$ shares[37]
  • Removable media
    • Creates DLL-based AutoRun trojan on attached removable drives[22]
  • HTTP pull
    • Downloads daily from any of 250 pseudorandom domains over 8 TLDs[35]
  • NetBIOS push
    • Patches MS08-067 to open reinfection backdoor in Server service[38][39]
  • Blocks certain DNS lookups
  • Disables AutoUpdate
  • Updates self to Conficker C or D[36]
Conficker C 2009-02-20
  • NetBIOS
    • Exploits MS08-067 vulnerability in Server service[32]
    • Dictionary attack on ADMIN$ shares[37]
  • Removable media
    • Creates DLL-based AutoRun trojan on attached removable drives[22]
  • HTTP pull
    • Downloads daily from 500 of 50,000 pseudorandom domains over 8 TLDs per day[32]
  • NetBIOS push
    • Patches MS08-067 to open reinfection backdoor in Server service[38][39]
    • Creates named pipe to receive URL from remote host, then downloads from URL
  • Blocks certain DNS lookups
  • Disables AutoUpdate
  • Updates self to Conficker D[36]
Conficker D 2009-03-04 None
  • HTTP pull
    • Downloads daily from any 500 of 50,000 pseudorandom domains over 110 TLDs[35]
  • P2P push/pull
    • Uses custom protocol to scan for infected peers via UDP, then transfer via TCP[40]
  • Blocks certain DNS lookups[41]
    • Does an in-memory patch of DNSAPI.DLL to block lookups of anti-malware related web sites[41]
  • Disables Safe Mode[41]
  • Disables AutoUpdate
  • Kills anti-malware
    • Scans for and terminates processes with names of anti-malware, patch or diagnostic utilities at one-second intervals[42]
  • Downloads and installs Conficker E[36]
Conficker E 2009-04-07
  • NetBIOS
    • Exploits MS08-067 vulnerability in Server service[43]
  • NetBIOS push
    • Patches MS08-067 to open reinfection backdoor in Server service
  • P2P push/pull
    • Uses custom protocol to scan for infected peers via UDP, then transfer via TCP[40]
  • Blocks certain DNS lookups
  • Disables AutoUpdate
  • Kills anti-malware
    • Scans for and terminates processes with names of anti-malware, patch or diagnostic utilities at one-second intervals[44]
  • Updates local copy of Conficker C to Conficker D[45]
  • Downloads and installs malware payload:
  • Removes self on 3 May 2009 (but leaves remaining copy of Conficker D)[47]

Initial infection

[edit]
  • Variants A, B, C and E exploit a vulnerability in the Server Service on Windows computers, in which an already-infected source computer uses a specially-crafted RPC request to force a buffer overflow and execute shellcode on the target computer.[48] On the source computer, the virus runs an HTTP server on a port between 1024 and 10000; the target shellcode connects back to this HTTP server to download a copy of the virus in DLL form, which it then attaches to svchost.exe.[39] Variants B and later may attach instead to a running services.exe or Windows Explorer process.[32] Attaching to those processes might be detected by the application trust feature of an installed firewall.
  • Variants B and C can remotely execute copies of themselves through the ADMIN$ share on computers visible over NetBIOS. If the share is password-protected, a dictionary attack is attempted, potentially generating large amounts of network traffic and tripping user account lockout policies.[49]
  • Variants B and C place a copy of their DLL form in the recycle.bin of any attached removable media (such as USB flash drives), from which they can then infect new hosts through the Windows AutoRun mechanism[22] using a manipulated autorun.inf.

To start itself at system boot, the virus saves a copy of its DLL form to a random filename in the Windows system or system32 folder, then adds registry keys to have svchost.exe invoke that DLL as an invisible network service.[32]

Payload propagation

[edit]

The virus has several mechanisms for pushing or pulling executable payloads over the network. These payloads are used by the virus to update itself to newer variants, and to install additional malware.

  • Variant A generates a list of 250 domain names every day across five TLDs. The domain names are generated from a pseudo-random number generator (PRNG) seeded with the current date to ensure that every copy of the virus generates the same names each day. The virus then attempts an HTTP connection to each domain name in turn, expecting from any of them a signed payload.[32]
  • Variant B increases the number of TLDs to eight, and has a generator tweaked to produce domain names disjoint from those of A.[32]
    • To counter the virus's use of pseudorandom domain names, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and several TLD registries began in February 2009 a coordinated barring of transfers and registrations for these domains.[50] Variant D counters this by generating daily a pool of 50,000 domains across 110 TLDs, from which it randomly chooses 500 to attempt for that day. The generated domain names were also shortened from 8–11 to 4–9 characters to make them more difficult to detect with heuristics. This new pull mechanism (which was disabled until April 1, 2009)[33][42] is unlikely to propagate payloads to more than 1% of infected hosts per day, but is expected to function as a seeding mechanism for the virus's peer-to-peer network.[35] The shorter generated names, however, are expected to collide with 150–200 existing domains per day, potentially causing a distributed denial-of-service attack (DDoS) on sites serving those domains. However the large number of generated domains and the fact that not every domain will be contacted for a given day will probably prevent DDoS situations.[51]
  • Variant C creates a named pipe, over which it can push URLs for downloadable payloads to other infected hosts on a local area network.[42]
  • Variants B, C and E perform in-memory patches to NetBIOS-related DLLs to close MS08-067 and watch for re-infection attempts through the same vulnerability. Re-infection from more recent versions of Conficker are allowed through, effectively turning the vulnerability into a propagation backdoor.[38]
  • Variants D and E create an ad-hoc peer-to-peer network to push and pull payloads over the wider Internet. This aspect of the virus is heavily obfuscated in code and not fully understood, but has been observed to use large-scale UDP scanning to build up a peer list of infected hosts and TCP for subsequent transfers of signed payloads. To make analysis more difficult, port numbers for connections are hashed from the IP address of each peer.[40][42]

Armoring

[edit]

To prevent payloads from being hijacked, variant A payloads are first SHA-1-hashed and RC4-encrypted with the 512-bit hash as a key. The hash is then RSA-signed with a 1024-bit private key.[39] The payload is unpacked and executed only if its signature verifies with a public key embedded in the virus. Variants B and later use MD6 as their hash function and increase the size of the RSA key to 4096 bits.[42] Conficker B adopted MD6 mere months after it was first published; six weeks after a weakness was discovered in an early version of the algorithm and a new version was published, Conficker upgraded to the new MD6.[6]

Self-defense

[edit]

The DLL- Form of the virus is protected against deletion by setting its ownership to "SYSTEM", which locks it from deletion even if the user is granted with administrator privileges. The virus stores a backup copy of this DLL disguised as a .jpg image in the Internet Explorer cache of the user network services.

Variant C of the virus resets System Restore points and disables a number of system services such as Windows Automatic Update, Windows Security Center, Windows Defender and Windows Error Reporting.[52] Processes matching a predefined list of antiviral, diagnostic or system patching tools are watched for and terminated.[53] An in-memory patch is also applied to the system resolver DLL to block lookups of hostnames related to antivirus software vendors and the Windows Update service.[42]

End action

[edit]

Variant E of the virus was the first to use its base of infected computers for an ulterior purpose.[46] It downloads and installs, from a web server hosted in Ukraine, two additional payloads:[54]

Symptoms

[edit]

Symptoms of a Conficker infection include:

Response

[edit]

On 12 February 2009, Microsoft announced the formation of an industry group to collaboratively counter Conficker. The group, which has since been informally dubbed the Conficker Cabal, includes Microsoft, Afilias, ICANN, Neustar, Verisign, China Internet Network Information Center, Public Internet Registry, Global Domains International, M1D Global, America Online, Symantec, F-Secure, ISC, researchers from Georgia Tech, The Shadowserver Foundation, Arbor Networks, and Support Intelligence.[6][31][61]

From Microsoft

[edit]

On 13 February 2009, Microsoft offered a $USD250,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the individuals behind the creation and/or distribution of Conficker.[62]

From registries

[edit]

ICANN has sought preemptive barring of domain transfers and registrations from all TLD registries affected by the virus's domain generator. Those which have taken action include:

  • On 13 March 2009, NIC Chile, the .cl ccTLD registry, blocked all the domain names informed by the Conficker Working Group and reviewed a hundred already registered from the worm list.[63]
  • On 24 March 2009, CIRA, the Canadian Internet Registration Authority, locked all previously unregistered .ca domain names expected to be generated by the virus over the next 12 months.[64]
  • On 27 March 2009, NIC-Panama, the .pa ccTLD registry, blocked all the domain names informed by the Conficker Working Group.[65]
  • On 30 March 2009, SWITCH, the Swiss ccTLD registry, announced it was "taking action to protect internet addresses with the endings .ch and .li from the Conficker computer worm."[66]
  • On 31 March 2009, NASK, the Polish ccTLD registry, locked over 7,000 .pl domains expected to be generated by the virus over the following five weeks. NASK has also warned that worm traffic may unintentionally inflict a DDoS attack to legitimate domains which happen to be in the generated set.[67]
  • On 2 April 2009, Island Networks, the ccTLD registry for Guernsey and Jersey, confirmed after investigations and liaison with the IANA that no .gg or .je names were in the set of names generated by the virus.

By mid-April 2009 all domain names generated by Conficker A had been successfully locked or preemptively registered, rendering its update mechanism ineffective.[68]

Origin

[edit]

Working group members stated at the 2009 Black Hat Briefings that Ukraine is the probable origin of the virus, but declined to reveal further technical discoveries about the virus's internals to avoid tipping off its authors.[69] An initial variant of Conficker did not infect systems with Ukrainian IP addresses or with Ukrainian keyboard layouts.[6] The payload of Conficker.E was downloaded from a host in Ukraine.[54]

In 2015, Phil Porras, Vinod Yegneswaran and Hassan Saidi – who were the first to detect and reverse-engineer Conficker – wrote in the Journal of Sensitive Cyber Research and Engineering, a classified, peer-reviewed U.S. government cybersecurity publication, that they tracked the malware to a group of Ukrainian cybercriminals. Porras et al. believed that the criminals abandoned Conficker after it had spread much more widely than they assumed it would, reasoning that any attempt to use it would draw too much attention from law enforcement worldwide. This explanation is widely accepted in the cybersecurity field.[16]

In 2011, working with the FBI, Ukrainian police arrested three Ukrainians in relation to Conficker, but there are no records of them being prosecuted or convicted. A Swede, Mikael Sallnert, was sentenced to 48 months in prison in the U.S. after a guilty plea.[16]

Removal and detection

[edit]

Due to the lock of the virus files against deletion as long as the system is running, the manual or automatic removal itself has to be performed during boot process or with an external system installed. Deleting any existing backup copy is a crucial step.

Microsoft released a removal guide for the virus, and recommended using the current release of its Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool[70] to remove the virus, then applying the patch to prevent re-infection.[71] Newer versions of Windows are immune to Conficker.[16]

Third-party software

[edit]

Many third-party anti-virus software vendors have released detection updates to their products and claim to be able to remove the worm. The evolving process of the malware shows some adoption to the common removal software, so it is likely that some of them might remove or at least disable some variants, while others remain active or, even worse, deliver a false positive to the removal software and become active with the next reboot.

Automated remote detection

[edit]

On 27 March 2009, Felix Leder and Tillmann Werner from the Honeynet Project discovered that Conficker-infected hosts have a detectable signature when scanned remotely.[39] The peer-to-peer command protocol used by variants D and E of the virus has since been partially reverse-engineered, allowing researchers to imitate the virus network's command packets and positively identify infected computers en-masse.[72][73]

Signature updates for a number of network scanning applications are now available.[74][75]

It can also be detected in passive mode by sniffing broadcast domains for repeating ARP requests.

US CERT

[edit]

The United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team (US-CERT) recommends disabling AutoRun to prevent Variant B of the virus from spreading through removable media. Prior to the release of Microsoft knowledgebase article KB967715,[76] US-CERT described Microsoft's guidelines on disabling Autorun as being "not fully effective" and provided a workaround for disabling it more effectively.[77] US-CERT has also made a network-based tool for detecting Conficker-infected hosts available to federal and state agencies.[78]

See also

[edit]
Wikinews has related news:

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Conficker

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Conficker, also known as Downadup and Kido, is a that targets Windows operating systems by exploiting the MS08-067 vulnerability in the service (SVCHOST.EXE), enabling remote code execution without authentication. First detected on November 21, 2008, the worm spreads across networks via port 445 (SMB), copies itself to removable drives using AutoPlay functionality, and brute-forces weak administrator passwords on network shares, rapidly infecting millions of computers worldwide and forming a resilient . The worm evolved through multiple variants, beginning with Conficker.A in late November 2008, which focused on network propagation and basic delivery. Conficker.B emerged on December 29, 2008, introducing daily generation of 250 randomized domain names for command-and-control (C&C) communications to evade takedowns, while subsequent versions like Conficker.C (February 2009) added (P2P) updates among infected hosts and increased domain generation to 50,000 possibilities across 116 top-level domains (TLDs). Later variants, including Conficker.D (March 2009) and Conficker.E (April 2009), enhanced stealth by disabling Windows services, deleting points, blocking access to security websites, and downloading additional such as the Waledac Trojan or . By mid-2009, estimates indicated over 10 million infections globally, affecting home users, enterprises, and , with persistent activity reported even a decade later due to unpatched legacy systems. The outbreak prompted an unprecedented international response, including the formation of the Conficker in January 2009 by , , Symantec, and over 100 TLD registries, law enforcement agencies, and cybersecurity firms. Efforts involved preemptively registering and sinkholing millions of generated domains to disrupt C&C channels, with offering a $250,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of its creators on , 2009. Mitigation strategies emphasized applying the MS08-067 patch released by on October 23, 2008, disabling AutoRun, using updated , and employing removal tools like 's . Despite these measures, Conficker highlighted vulnerabilities in unpatched systems and spurred advancements in collaborative cybersecurity, influencing responses to later threats like , which also exploited MS08-067. As of 2025, Conficker continues to be detected in the wild due to unpatched legacy systems.

Background

Discovery and Naming

The Conficker worm was first detected on November 21, 2008, by cybersecurity researchers Phil Porras and Vinod Yegneswaran at . It specifically targeted unpatched Windows systems by exploiting a critical remote code execution vulnerability in the Server service, detailed in Microsoft Security Bulletin MS08-067. This vulnerability, patched on October 28, 2008, allowed the worm to propagate across networks without authentication. The worm's emerged amid independent detections by multiple firms in late , causing initial confusion as researchers applied different labels based on their analyses of samples and behaviors. coined the name "Conficker," a portmanteau combining "con" from the domain trafficconverter.biz—used as an early command-and-control site—with "ficker," derived from the German word for (Spechtficker). Alternative names proliferated due to varying detection methods and file artifacts: Symantec designated it as W32.Downadup or Kido, reflecting patterns in its download and update mechanisms; labeled it Downup, emphasizing similar propagation traits. Other firms used terms like Conflicker, drawn from misspellings or code strings in samples. These names often stemmed from the worm's practice of generating random file and service names, such as eight-character strings prefixed with "con" or fully randomized extensions like .dll or .exe, to evade detection.

Initial Prevalence and Impact

Conficker rapidly proliferated in early 2009, infecting an estimated 9 to 15 million Windows machines worldwide by January, with the peak occurring around February as variants like Conficker.B and Conficker.C emerged. The worm disproportionately affected consumer devices and networks, where patching was often delayed or inconsistent, leading to widespread compromise of home computers, cafes, labs, and under-resourced enterprises. This scale underscored vulnerabilities in unpatched systems running and Server 2003, though infections spanned over 190 countries. Europe experienced some of the most severe disruptions, with the United Kingdom's National Health Service (NHS) facing significant outages; for instance, hospitals in reported major network issues in January 2009, forcing staff to revert to manual processes, while the and Clyde NHS Trust saw PCs offline for two days, resulting in 51 canceled appointments. In , the navy's Intramar network was infected on January 12, 2009, leading to the quarantine of systems and the grounding of Rafale fighter jets in January as pilots could not access flight plans. The saw lesser but notable effects, including infections in parts of the , prompting the Department of to release a detection tool in March 2009. In , where approximately 45% of infections were concentrated due to higher rates of outdated software, disruptions affected business and public sectors, though specific large-scale outages were less documented compared to Europe. The worm's immediate economic toll was substantial, with global remediation efforts, lost productivity, and network downtime estimated at $9.1 billion by April 2009, encompassing costs for scanning, patching, and system restores across infected entities. Public sector impacts amplified these figures; for example, in the incurred £1.5 million ($2.4 million) in cleanup costs, while another council reported £1.4 million for recovery from a single infection cluster. These expenses highlighted the worm's role in straining resources, particularly in healthcare and networks where directly impaired operations.

Technical Details

Infection Vectors

Conficker primarily infects systems by exploiting the MS08-067 vulnerability in the Windows Server service, which allows remote code execution without authentication on unpatched , XP, Vista, Server 2003, and Server 2008 systems. This flaw, detailed in CVE-2008-4250, enables the worm to execute arbitrary code over the network via the (RPC) interface, often targeting port 445 for TCP connections. Beyond network-based exploitation, Conficker spreads through removable media such as USB drives by creating an autorun.inf file that executes a randomly named DLL payload when the device is inserted into a compatible Windows system. It also targets network shares, including administrative shares like ADMIN$, by performing dictionary attacks using a list of approximately 250 common passwords to gain access to weakly protected folders. Upon successful , Conficker copies itself as a dynamically linked (DLL) with a random name consisting of 5 to 8 lowercase letters to the %System% directory, such as C:\Windows\System32. To achieve persistence, it modifies the by adding an entry to HKLM\SOFTWARE[Microsoft](/page/Microsoft)\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run, referencing the DLL for automatic execution on system reboot.

Propagation Methods

Conficker primarily propagates through network-based exploitation and file-sharing attacks, targeting unpatched Windows systems vulnerable to the MS08-067 flaw in the Server service. Once active on an infected machine, the worm scans random ranges within predefined subnets, such as those in the , ARIN, , and RIPE delegations, while avoiding private and reserved addresses to maximize reach across the . It attempts connections on TCP port 445, sending specially crafted RPC requests via SMB to exploit the vulnerability and download a copy of itself as a DLL, executed remotely without user interaction. Additionally, variants like Conficker.B incorporate brute-force attacks on shares, attempting access to (e.g., ADMIN$) using the current user's credentials or a hardcoded list of 248 common weak passwords, such as "password" and "123456," to copy the payload and schedule its execution. To facilitate command-and-control (C2) communication that supports further propagation instructions, Conficker employs a (DGA) to produce pseudorandom domain names, evading traditional efforts by researchers. Early variants (A and B) generate 250 domains per day, seeded by the current UTC date using a custom that produces 5- to 11-character strings appended to a set of top-level domains like .com, .net, .org, .info, and .biz (with B adding .ws, .cn, and .cc); infected systems query these domains in batches every 2 to 3 hours. Starting with Conficker.C, the worm generates approximately 50,000 domains daily across 110 TLDs, using 4- to 10-character random strings to create a vast, daily-changing set from which a (e.g., 500) is probed via HTTP for C2 servers, ensuring resilience against sinkholing or takedowns. Conficker's binaries incorporate armoring techniques to obfuscate its code and evade detection during propagation, employing multi-layered packing and encryption that vary across variants to hinder . It uses as a base packer with an additional custom layer, decrypting payloads via and validating integrity with RSA signatures (1024-bit for variant A, 4096-bit for B and later); this process includes anti-debugging checks, such as detecting debuggers or virtual environments, triggering "suicide" logic to delete the binary if tampering is detected. Subsequent variants like Conficker.C introduce polymorphic elements through dual-layer packing and code modifications per infection cycle, altering the binary structure to resist signature-based antivirus scanning while spreading via network or media vectors. For offline spread, Conficker targets removable media such as USB drives, copying itself to these devices and creating an file to exploit Windows AutoPlay functionality. The worm renames its executable to mimic innocuous files, such as those with .scr or .pif extensions, and configures the autorun entry to execute upon insertion, often displaying a deceptive label like "Open folder to view files" to lure users into activation; this vector was prominent in variants A through E, though mitigated by updates like KB971029. Network-shared folders are similarly infected by placing the and payload, enabling propagation in enterprise environments where circulates.

Self-Protection Mechanisms

Conficker implemented several mechanisms to protect itself from detection, analysis, and removal by security tools and administrators. One primary defense involved disabling key Windows services that facilitate updates, scanning, and recovery. Specifically, the worm targeted and halted services such as Windows Automatic Update, Windows Security Center, Windows Defender, (BITS), and to prevent automated patching or malware detection. Additionally, it deleted points to eliminate potential rollback options and interfered with scheduled tasks related to security updates, ensuring persistence by blocking routine maintenance processes. To evade reverse engineering and dynamic analysis, Conficker incorporated anti-analysis techniques that detected virtual machines, debuggers, and sandboxes. For virtual machine detection, it executed the SLDT (Store Local Descriptor Table) processor instruction to retrieve the LDT selector value; a zero value indicated a physical host, while non-zero values (such as 0x4058 in ) triggered evasion behaviors like an indefinite sleep call via (-1), halting execution for approximately 29,826 hours. Anti-debugging measures included general and checks to avoid disassembly, such as potential timing anomalies and calls like IsDebuggerPresent, though specifics varied across variants; if analysis was detected, the worm altered its behavior or terminated processes to frustrate investigators. These features, combined with "" and packing, made static and dynamic analysis challenging. On the network level, Conficker blocked access to security resources by patching the DNSAPI.DLL library in memory, intercepting and redirecting DNS queries for over 100 domains associated with antivirus vendors and services, including microsoft.com, symantec.com, and windowsupdate.com. This was achieved by hooking system DNS and networking APIs to filter queries containing suspicious strings like "" or "," preventing infected systems from downloading updates or signatures. For resilience against command-and-control (C2) takedowns, later variants (C and E) employed a peer-to-peer (P2P) update mechanism over UDP for peer discovery and TCP for file transfer, allowing infected machines to share signed binaries directly without relying on external domains. This scan-based P2P network used cryptographic validation with RC4 encryption and 4096-bit RSA signatures to ensure authenticity, enabling decentralized propagation of updates even if DNS-based C2 channels were blocked.

Payload Execution

Upon successful infection, Conficker executes its core by establishing communication with command-and-control (C2) servers to download and run additional malicious modules. These modules are fetched via HTTP from domains generated by the worm's (DGA), which produces lists of potential rendezvous points daily or more frequently in later variants. The downloaded files are validated using RSA public-key signatures before execution, ensuring only authorized payloads are run, and are often executed within the worm's own process space using functions like CreateThread for stealth. This separates the propagation and self-protection components from the , allowing remote updates without requiring full reinfection of the host. Early variants, such as Conficker.A, attempted to download benign or -focused files like loadadv.exe, a small HTTP server used to facilitate further spread rather than direct harm. However, the was inherently capable of delivering more aggressive , including those for spam distribution, distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, or , though such activations were rare in practice. A significant escalation occurred on , 2009, when Conficker.C activated its enhanced DGA, generating up to 50,000 domains per day across over 100 top-level domains and querying 500 randomly selected ones for commands. This enabled the to receive instructions for execution at scale, with infected systems sleeping for up to three days post-contact before resuming activity. In controlled analyses, this mechanism supported modular payloads such as droppers, but real-world deployment remained limited to avoid drawing attention. Later variants, starting with Conficker.E in April 2009, demonstrated the payload's potential through actual distributions, including the Waledac for campaigns and SpyProtect, a fake antivirus () program designed to trick users into purchasing bogus removal tools. These examples highlight the worm's role as a downloader for monetization-focused , executed seamlessly via sharing among bots or direct C2 fetches, while maintaining separation from the core worm body to enable flexible, low-detection updates.

Global Response

Coordinated Efforts

In February 2009, the Conficker Working Group (CWG) was formed as a multi-stakeholder collaboration involving , , domain registries such as and , internet service providers, and security organizations including Symantec, , and the Shadowserver Foundation, to coordinate a global response against the Conficker worm. The group emerged from initial meetings in early 2009, including one on February 3 in , aimed at disrupting the worm's propagation and command-and-control infrastructure without relying on individual entity actions. A key initiative of the CWG was domain sinkholing, which began in March 2009 with the coordinated registration and redirection of domains generated by Conficker's (DGA). By preemptively securing these domains across over 100 top-level domains (TLDs), the group blocked approximately 250 domains daily for Conficker.B, effectively preventing infected systems from communicating with potential command-and-control servers and disrupting the botnet's operations. This effort escalated on April 1, 2009, when Conficker variant C activated its more complex DGA generating up to 50,000 domains daily across 110 TLDs, but the CWG's proactive measures ensured most generated domains were neutralized before exploitation. The CWG also supported public awareness campaigns through joint advisories issued by organizations such as US-CERT and ENISA, emphasizing the urgency of applying security patches and implementing detection tools to mitigate infections. These efforts, combined with global takedown operations involving and CERT teams, significantly reduced Conficker's prevalence by mid-2009, with sinkholing rendering the botnet's coordinated activities largely ineffective and limiting its estimated infections to around 7 million systems by late 2009. By 2019, infections had declined to approximately 500,000 globally, though residual activity persists in unpatched legacy systems as of 2025. The CWG's efforts continued into the 2010s, blocking tens of thousands of domains daily as of 2011, and served as a model for collaborative cybersecurity responses.

Vendor-Specific Actions

Microsoft released security bulletin MS08-067 on October 23, 2008, providing a patch for a critical vulnerability in the Windows Server service that Conficker exploited for initial propagation, prior to the worm's discovery later that month. Following the outbreak, Microsoft updated its Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool (MSRT) in February 2009 to detect and remove Conficker.B, the variant that introduced domain generation algorithms for command-and-control communication, making the tool freely available to users worldwide. Antivirus vendors responded rapidly by developing detection signatures for Conficker variants. Symantec incorporated signatures into its and products starting in late November 2008, enabling heuristic and exact-match detection of the worm's files and network behavior. McAfee updated its VirusScan and Total Protection suites with signatures for Conficker.A by December 2008, focusing on its RPC exploitation and modifications. Other vendors, including and , followed suit with signature releases in early 2009 to address evolving variants. F-Secure enhanced its rootkit detection tool, originally released in 2005, to identify Conficker's hiding mechanisms in variants like Conficker.C, which employed kernel-mode techniques to evade standard antivirus scans. Registry operators, coordinated through the , preemptively registered or blocked domains generated by Conficker's algorithm across top-level domains such as .com and .net, preventing the worm from receiving updates starting in February 2009. facilitated this by encouraging national registries to the daily-generated domains—up to 50,000 potential names per variant—effectively disrupting the botnet's command structure without legal seizures in most cases. This vendor-led initiative, involving operators like , limited Conficker's adaptability and reduced its global infection rate over time.

Detection and Removal Strategies

Detecting Conficker infections manually involves observing specific symptoms on affected Windows systems. Common indicators include the inability to access security-related websites such as those of , Symantec, or , which the worm blocks to hinder remediation efforts. Other signs encompass disabled Windows services like Automatic Updates, Windows Defender, (BITS), and , leading to failed security updates and error reporting. Systems may exhibit unusual network traffic, such as excessive attempts to connect to random domains for command-and-control, slow performance due to resource consumption, or account lockouts from the worm's password-guessing attacks on network shares. Additionally, suspicious files like on removable drives or randomly named DLLs (e.g., doieuln.dll) in the System32 directory, loaded via processes in atypical ways, can signal . Third-party antivirus tools provide effective automated detection and removal options for Conficker. Scanners from vendors like , , and Kaspersky can identify and quarantine the worm through full system scans, often detecting variants via signature-based and behavioral analysis. For instance, ESET's standalone Conficker Removal Tool performs targeted cleaning on infected machines, while Kaspersky's KidoKiller utility specifically removes the worm and its remnants from Windows systems. Network-level detection can be achieved using tools like with Conficker-specific scripts to scan for the MS08-067 vulnerability exploited by the worm, enabling remote identification of vulnerable or infected hosts without direct access. US-CERT recommends a multi-step approach for removal, emphasizing prevention of reinfection. First, apply the critical MS08-067 patch to close the primary vulnerability, followed by disabling Autorun features via registry edits or to block spread through —such as setting NoDriveTypeAutoRun to 0xFF in HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software[Microsoft](/page/Microsoft)\Windows\CurrentVersion\Policies\Explorer. Change all administrator passwords immediately after patching, as the worm attempts weak password guesses. For full eradication, disconnect the system from the network, run an updated antivirus scan, and perform manual cleanup: delete scheduled tasks created via AT command (using AT /Delete /Yes), disable the Task Scheduler service by setting its Start value to 4 in HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Schedule, remove random entries from the netsvcs value in HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE[Microsoft](/page/Microsoft)\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\SvcHost, and delete associated DLLs and files. Re-enable disabled services post-cleanup and verify with a boot-time scan using tools like 's Safety Scanner. Removing Conficker presents challenges due to its rootkit-like hiding techniques, which conceal files and processes, often requiring multiple reboots and boot-time or offline scans to bypass active defenses. Post-2009 variants persist on legacy systems like unpatched or Server 2003, where outdated security features and lack of support exacerbate vulnerability to reinfection via network shares or removable drives. In such environments, comprehensive imaging and restoration from clean backups may be necessary if standard tools fail to fully eradicate remnants.

Attribution and Legacy

Suspected Origins

The Conficker worm's suspected origins point strongly toward , based on several indicators identified through malware code analysis. Early variants of the worm included a routine that checked the system's keyboard layout and would terminate execution if it detected Ukrainian settings, effectively avoiding of local machines. This behavior, combined with IP filtering to avoid Ukrainian networks, led researchers to conclude that the was likely developed by programmers familiar with Ukrainian systems. Additionally, early and activity were reported from Ukrainian networks following the MS08-067 patch release in October 2008. Attributing Conficker to specific actors has proven challenging, with no definitive culprits identified despite extensive international investigations. Experts suspect it was created by an Eastern European group, possibly motivated by financial gain through botnet monetization, rather than state-sponsored , though some analyses have not ruled out hybrid threats. Efforts by the FBI and to trace the worm's creators yielded limited results by 2009, with ongoing coordination but no arrests of suspected authors. In , Ukrainian authorities, in collaboration with the FBI, arrested individuals involved in exploiting the Conficker for financial totaling over $72 million, but these operations targeted users rather than the worm's originators, and no prosecutions directly tied to its creation followed. This absence of accountability highlights the difficulties in prosecuting cross-border development, particularly when perpetrators employ techniques to mask their identities.

Long-Term Effects and Current Status

The Conficker worm significantly influenced cybersecurity practices by exposing critical gaps in patch management and fostering innovations in countering (DGAs) and botnet takedowns. Its exploitation of the unpatched MS08-067 vulnerability underscored the dangers of delayed patching, particularly in legacy systems, prompting to enhance its vulnerability response processes and reduce the frequency of such severe exploits. The formation of the Conficker Working Group (CWG) exemplified a new model of international among tech firms, researchers, and domain registrars, leading to sinkholing techniques that preemptively register DGA-generated domains to disrupt command-and-control communications—a strategy now standard in mitigation efforts. These advancements informed responses to subsequent threats, such as the 2017 WannaCry , which similarly spread via unpatched systems and highlighted the ongoing failure to apply lessons from Conficker's rapid propagation across millions of devices. Despite these improvements, Conficker remains an ongoing threat, with detections persisting in (OT) networks through 2021 and into 2025 due to unpatched legacy Windows systems like XP and Server 2003, which are prevalent in industrial environments. In 2021, observed Conficker actively spreading in OT settings, exploiting vulnerabilities to hijack devices for operations without immediate operational disruption but posing risks to connected human-machine interfaces. Detections continued into Q3 2024, with 556 instances reported by , and tracking efforts noted its presence in threat intelligence reports as late as March 2025, primarily infecting outdated, unpatched Windows installations via network shares and . As of November 2025, Conficker remains dormant with no reported major campaigns, though low-level detections persist in legacy systems. As of 2025, the Conficker botnet has been largely dormant since around , with no major campaigns observed, though an estimated hundreds of thousands of infections linger globally. The CWG continues to mitigate risks by blocking access to DGA-generated domains, rendering the ineffective for coordinated attacks and preventing its operators from regaining control. However, persistent vulnerabilities in unpatched legacy systems sustain risks, particularly in IoT and industrial environments where outdated Windows deployments enable lateral movement and potential revival, emphasizing the need for ongoing segmentation and modernization in .

References

  1. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/wdsi/threats/malware-encyclopedia-description?Name=Worm:Win32/Conficker.A
  2. https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/alerts/2009/03/29/conficker-worm-targets-microsoft-windows-systems
  3. https://www.secureworks.com/research/downadup-removal
  4. https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/conficker-summary-review-07may10-en.pdf
  5. https://blog-assets.f-secure.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/08015500/2019_conficker_infographic2.pdf
  6. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/security-updates/securitybulletins/2008/ms08-067
  7. https://redcanary.com/blog/threat-intelligence/intelligence-insights-march-2025/
  8. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/29/opinion/sunday/conficker-worm-ukraine.html
  9. https://www.welivesecurity.com/2016/11/21/odd-8-year-legacy-conficker-worm/
  10. https://academic.oup.com/book/40770/chapter/348692312
  11. https://www.caida.org/archive/ms08-067/conficker/
  12. https://www.virusbulletin.com/virusbulletin/2009/03/confounded-conficker
  13. https://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/worm-w32-downadup-a.shtml
  14. https://www.usenix.org/legacyurl/foray-confickers-logic-and-rendezvous-points-2
  15. https://www.radware.com/security/ddos-knowledge-center/ddospedia/conficker/
  16. https://www.unibw.de/infosecur/activities-1/erice-wfs-conficker-aug-2009.pdf
  17. https://www.theregister.com/2009/01/20/sheffield_conficker/
  18. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1353485809700820
  19. https://theaviationist.com/2009/02/13/french-navy-rafales-grounded-bya-computer-virus/
  20. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/feb/13/microsoft-offers-250k-bounty-conficker-worm
  21. https://www.dhs.gov/archive/news/2009/03/30/confickerdownadup-computer-worm-detection-tool-released
  22. https://www.zdnet.com/article/confickers-estimated-economic-cost-9-1-billion/
  23. https://www.zdnet.com/article/manchester-city-council-pays-2-4m-in-conficker-clean-up-costs/
  24. https://web-assets.esetstatic.com/wls/en/papers/white-papers/EsetWP-ConfickerByNumbers.pdf
  25. https://www.csl.sri.com/users/vinod/papers/Conficker/
  26. https://attack.mitre.org/software/S0608/
  27. https://www.emsisoft.com/en/blog/2315/viruses-that-went-viral-conficker/
  28. https://www.fortiguard.com/encyclopedia/virus/785963
  29. https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1547/001/
  30. https://www.pandasecurity.com/en/security-info/204292/Conficker.C/
  31. https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/leet09/tech/full_papers/porras/porras_html/index.html
  32. https://download.microsoft.com/download/A/3/0/A30A60D9-1303-4B6A-91B7-BB24E0211B05/Microsoft_Security_Intelligence_Report_volume_7_Jan-Jun2009.pdf
  33. https://www.csl.sri.com/users/vinod/papers/Conficker/addendumC/index.html
  34. https://www.csl.sri.com/users/vinod/papers/Conficker/P2P/index.html
  35. https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/virus-alert-about-the-win32-conficker-worm-73e7df59-ec59-d474-bbe8-1f06b7caef60
  36. https://isc.sans.edu/diary/More%2Btricks%2Bfrom%2BConficker%2Band%2BVM%2Bdetection/5842
  37. https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/leet09/tech/full_papers/porras/porras_html/index.html
  38. https://grahamcluley.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/conficker-analysis.pdf
  39. https://www.cybereason.com/blog/malicious-life-podcast-conficker
  40. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/wdsi/threats/malware-encyclopedia-description?Name=Worm:Win32/Conficker.E.dll
  41. https://www.senki.org/operators-security-toolkit/security-organizations/conficker-working-group-archive-of-materials/
  42. https://www.networkcomputing.com/network-security/conficker-group-offers-roadmap-for-stopping-worm
  43. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/wdsi/threats/malware-encyclopedia-description?Name=Worm%3AWin32%2FConficker.B!inf
  44. https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/remove-specific-prevalent-malware-with-windows-malicious-software-removal-tool-kb890830-ba51b71f-39cd-cdec-73eb-61979b0661e0
  45. https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/seizure-collateral-assess-24jan13-en.pdf
  46. http://docs.media.bitpipe.com/io_10x/io_102267/item_465972/whitepaper_76813745321.pdf
  47. https://www.ghacks.net/2009/03/31/conficker-worm-detection-and-removal/
  48. https://support.eset.com/en/kb2209-conficker-how-do-i-protect-myself
  49. https://www.softpedia.com/get/Antivirus/Net-Worm-Win32-Kido-Remover.shtml
  50. https://download.nai.com/products/mcafee-avert/documents/combating_w32_conficker_worm.pdf
  51. https://www.trendmicro.com/en_us/research/17/l/conficker-downad-9-years-examining-impact-legacy-systems.html
  52. https://www.usenix.org/events/leet09/tech/full_papers/porras/porras_html/index2.html
  53. https://archive.kyivpost.com/article/content/world/computer-experts-brace-for-conficker-worm-security-38697.html
  54. https://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/ptech/01/16/virus.downadup/index.html
  55. https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-statement-regarding-conficker-worm
  56. https://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/06/72m-scareware-ring-used-conficker-worm/
  57. https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2018/11/21/conficker/
  58. https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2017/05/14/wannacry-benefits-from-unlearned-lessons-of-slammer-conficker/
  59. https://www.ibm.com/think/x-force/operational-technology-ghost-malware-past
  60. https://www.watchguard.com/wgrd-news/blog/watchguard-labs-detects-300-surge-endpoint-malware-q3-2024
  61. https://www.theregister.com/2010/08/05/conficker_analysis/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.