Kaspersky: Duqu Trojan uses 'unknown programming language'

Post by schwa571 » Sat, Mar 10, 2012, 8:14 PM UTC

LeafStorm wrote: post #59

shmageggy wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The characteristics listed in the actual article (posted by computerbob: http://www.securelist.com/en/blog/667/The_Mystery_of_the_Duq... ) also support this conclusion. -Everything is wrapped into objects -Function table is placed directly into the class instance and can be modified after construction -There is no distinction between utility classes (linked lists, hashes) and user-written code -Objects communicate us…

Reminds me of Smalltalk.

Smalltalk objects typically don't have a per-object table of function pointers (some dialects do, such as Self).

Post by stef25 » Wed, Mar 14, 2012, 4:08 PM UTC

Tossrock wrote: post #119

stef25 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very cool from a geek / technological point of view but I can't help but think that non-lifesaving technology ultimately brings us little good, if you look at the big picture.

"Lifesaving" is a pretty nebulous concept. Does a plow which enables higher crop yields and thus less starvation constitute as life saving? Or a weather satellite, which allows prediction of rain patterns and more efficient irrigation usage? Modern technology is all interconnected, and only a few extreme leaf nodes could be unambiguously declared non-life saving.

I'd consider those examples as life-saving, yes. I was thinking more of yet another 'social' website that receives millions of dollars of funding.

Re: Kaspersky: Duqu Trojan uses 'unknown programming language'

Re: Kaspersky: Duqu Trojan uses 'unknown programming language'