So, essentially, really poorly written malware? Given the number of assumptions it makes without any sort of robustness around system configuration it’s about as good as any first-pass bash script.
It’d be a stretch to call it malware, it’s probably an outright fabrication to call it a virus.
It’s like that guy that posted an example Bitcoin miner on GitHub, then a bunch of script kiddies forgot to change his wallet info for their own before deploying… He made a good chunk of change by doing nothing malicious.
Text version:
Downloaded a virus for Linux lately and unpacked it. Tried to run it as root, didn’t work. Googled for 2 hours, found out that instead of
/usr/local/bin
the virus unpacked to/usr/bin
for which the user malware doesn’t have any write permissions, therefore the virus couldn’t create a process file. Found patched .configure and .make files on some Chinese forum, recompiled and rerun it. The virus said it needs the librarycmalw-lib-2.0
.Turns outcmalw-lib-2.0
is shipped with CentOS but not with Ubuntu. Googled for hours again and found an instruction to build a.deb package from source. The virus finally started, wrote some logs, made a core dump and crashed. After 1 hour of going through the logs I discovered the virus assumed it was running on ext4 and called into its disk encryption API. Under btrfs this API is deprecated. The kernel noticed and made this partition read-onlyOpened the sources, grep’ed the Bitcoin wallet and sent $5 out of pity.
if youre gonna write linux malware at least distribute it as a flatpak ffs