EternalRocks worm was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 25 June 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into EternalBlue. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microsoft Windows on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Microsoft WindowsWikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsTemplate:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsMicrosoft Windows articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
I would suggest that ETERNALBLUE is the 'correct' form. This is the form that's used for all the codenames in the ShadowBrokers releases, and all caps is a common convention for codenames (see CIA cryptonym). However, to be honest it looks pretty jarring in prose whether here or in the news media - which is why I think the CamelCasedEternalBlue has become far more popular. I personally don't propose changing the title of this article, or references elsewhere in Wikipedia - expect for the article The Shadow Brokers - where it's appropriate to use the original form. Snori (talk) 21:36, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"SMB ... of Microsoft Windows accepts specially crafted packets from remote attackers, allowing them to execute arbitrary code on the target computer".
But the question is: why did MS comply with the (NSA?) request to provide such access? Why has it not been detected by outside parties (walled garden?). Technical details are needed. Zezen (talk) 12:38, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think EternalBlue has its own official logo? So why fool people and make a logo for it? Fan art has no place on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.182.48.107 (talk) 16:46, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Who is to "blame" for Baltimore? City vs. NSA vs. several others[edit]
First I know a bit about computers, so there's a "common sense" perspective to be had that I can help provide. There has been a patch available for this exploit for over two years, and IMO the City of Baltimore has some share in the "blame". The reason for the focus on "blame" is that today's news mentions the idea that the NSA is to "blame" for the existance of the malware, which has some truth, but it's also true that the City of Baltimore failed to properly update their computers like any average person with a computer would be expected to do, and despite millions of dollars being spent by the City on "IT", and a history of scandal. Four of their IT chiefs have resigned under cloud of scandal since 2012. I have RS for all of this, and limited Wikipedia skills. My proposal is to insert a balanced perspective, citing both the "blame the NSA" side of the issue, and also the "it's Baltimore's own fault" side of the issue. Which my limited Wikipedia awareness tells me is going to require some "synth". Is anyone interested on doing this with me. I'd rather not "go it alone" here. I've got RS to support both sides (for balance), and I suppose the 1st thing to do is get them into the list of citations at the bottom of the Article, but tbh I don't even know how to do that yet. Help?Tym Whittier (talk) 20:40, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No. Victim blaming shouldn't be encouraged. 194.207.86.26 (talk) 06:29, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Um no blame for Microsoft? They're the ones responsible for the vulnerability in the first place. 206.125.145.230 (talk) 13:40, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You're forgetting an enormous amount of people who use PCs don't even know how to check for a Windows update and are overwhelmed by setting up a new account on Windows. So victim blaming, aside from being not cool in any context, in this sense is not even logical. Warm Yellow Sunflower (talk) 17:25, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I just read this article wanting to learn more about it. I vaguely remember that this is related to wannacry. I had to go to that page to figure out the millions to billions in damages that happened as a result. All this is to say that this article needs more on that in its introduction. That's important information that's related to why this article is worth reading. 50.104.95.67 (talk) 02:49, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
