facebook rss twitter

Microsoft given legal help to take-down botnets

by Pete Mason on 9 September 2010, 14:01

Tags: Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qazyo

Add to My Vault: x

Botnets are a major scourge of the internet-connected world, but this week Microsoft won a key victory over the people who run them.  A judge has recommended that legal ownership of 276 domain names used for the Waledac botnet be transferred to the company so that it can finally be shut down.

This comes after the court granted a temporary restraining-order against those same domains in February.  Microsoft, along with a number of partners, worked for months to investigate, plan and co-ordinate the action to bring down the command servers before the bot-herders were able to move their operations.

A map showing Waledac infections worldwide

Waledac was one of the largest botnets in existence and at its peak controlled almost 70,000 infected PCs.  This allowed it to send up to 1.5 billion spam e-mails every day.

With ownership of the domains transferred to Microsoft, it will be able to shut-down the command and control servers for good, preventing the botnet from recovering.  However, it won't be able to help the tens of thousands of computers still infected with the original malware.

Though Waledac has been all but inactive since the original restraining order was granted, this week's decision - the first of its kind - will hopefully be the one of many.  Its success may make it quicker and easier for others to use the power of the courts to help stop spammers.

Default judgement will be filed in Microsoft's favour in two weeks time, assuming that the defendants don't object to the decision during that period.



HEXUS Forums :: 3 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
Anyone else surprised (or not surprised) that the headline wasn't “Law enforcement agencies get off their bums and do something about the large botnets spamming the interweb”. I know Microsoft's poor OS security was partially to blame, but seriously it would be a lot easier if it was just “there's a crime being committed, lets stop it”.
I have to say that Nominet and the other DNS registries have been doing this for ages, its nothing new, We work with the police, trading standards and other agencies to take action on lots of issues not just botnets.
MaddAussie
I have to say that Nominet and the other DNS registries have been doing this for ages, its nothing new, We work with the police, trading standards and other agencies to take action on lots of issues not just botnets.

I think the point was (sorry if it wasn't clear) that this is the first time that it's been done through the court like this.

The really unique thing (entering law geek mode) was that the hearings were - obviously - ex parte, meaning that the herders weren't present. Getting an interim remedy (injunction, freezing order, restraining order, etc) ex parte is pretty common, especially for freezing orders, but a judgement - especially for something that isn't a really straight forward case, like simple breach of contract - is quite rare. As far as my understanding goes, that's even more true in the US, where they're very big on supporting the rights of the individual to be heard in court.