What a mystery
"not written in C++ and it's not compiled with Microsoft's Visual C++ 2008".
What a mystery there is something else too.
Security researchers are appealing for help after discovering that part of the Duqu Trojan was written in an unknown programming language. Duqu is a sophisticated Trojan reckoned to have been created by the same group behind the infamous Stuxnet worm. While the finely tuned Stuxnet worm was designed to home in on specific …
Reminds me about the story of the supposedly biggest ever deployment of the scheme language was an interpreter some poor techie embedded into his employer's toolbar / adware / malware for the express purpose of detecting rival's malware and disabling it. There was such a constant state of flux between the different camps, a lightweight framework for distributing and executing the day's new rules gave them a huge advantage apparently.
In modern terms though, object orientated and lightweight would suggest Lua. Perhaps the byte code is obfuscated.
Igor Soumenkov says it's not Lua.
My money is on some kind of Lisp.
After all: http://www.franz.com/success/customer_apps/animation_graphics/naughtydog.lhtml
"With leading edge game systems like ours, you have to deal with complicated behaviors and real-time action. Languages like C are very poor with temporal constructs. C is just very awkward for a project like this. Lisp, on the other hand, is ideal."
Lateral thoughts: Anyone remember Thierry Breton's "Softwar" Cyberthrilling Cyberpotboiler back from the 80's?
So, you have forgotten how to read English? "These guys" have no problem reading the x86 disassembly and understanding what the code DOES. What they are wondering is what language it was originally written in and compiled from. It definitely wasn't hand-written x86 assembly.
From the looks of it, my guess would be one of the relatively less-widely used object-oriented languages. Maybe compiled Pyhton or Forth... Compiled Perl might be worth looking at, although personally I think it's unlikely.
This sort of news does not inspire confidence in an already dubious anti-virus industry, that spends more money on market research than anti-virus research and has to call out to the masses: "Help us find out how this was written."
What I would do with actual budget figures from a major AV firm. Even without that information, if they spent more money on AV research than market research, we'd have an off-the-shelf profile-based virus product that can catch this sort of thing before it's written, instead of boxes of the same-old after-the-fact garbage with pictures of Iron Man on the front.
Realistically, given the likely provenance of these babies, if I was running the project then the first thing I'd do would be write a language specifically for them ... after all, if it's a government project then money isn't going to be a big issue. And a virus^H^H^H^H^H payload specific language would offer significant advantages.
From what little I remember about Ada when I took the class, was that it was not a compiler, not an interpreter, but a translator, which spit out FORTRAN on the IBM 4361. What a joke. One Ada run took 8 minutes to complete and if more than one was running, it was more like 20 minutes.
I was going to speculate before I read the article. Then I thought, if it's really that obscure, those spooks just want to know if anyone has knowledge about it, so they can interrogate^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H question the person about whether or not they had anything to do with writing the actual code (!)
@Destroy All Monsters: Yes there are! Once ADA runtimes emerged that actually used O/S facilities like threads instead of re-creating those things for themselves, ADA got a *lot* better. From what I vaguely remember, Greenhills ADA on VxWorks was pretty decent indeed.
I can remember the problems that a bunch of colleagues had in the very early '90s with ADA (on Vax I think). The application they'd written was too large for any of the ADA runtimes of the day to actually run. I never found out if they ever got it going...
I think you must be going back a long way. I don't know if early Ada was ever implemented as a translator to Fortran, but I'm pretty certain by Ada 95 (when I was learning it), it had its own compiler that did not go via Fortran. I think performance between Ada 95 and Fortran was comparable. In any case, the reason you used Ada wasn't for speed but because its safety features meant your code was "provably" correct. (Just don't mention the Arianne 5 explosion).
I seriously doubt anyone has written the core of a virus in Ada. Though I would be amused to be proved wrong.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019