Creator Of Manticore
Level 1
- Jun 8, 2014
- 10
AV##### and Dsplit is also another very famous method used to FUD malwares.Quite honestly if you need to rely on a "crypter" to make something "FUD" then you're not going to get very far.
AV##### and Dsplit is also another very famous method used to FUD malwares.Quite honestly if you need to rely on a "crypter" to make something "FUD" then you're not going to get very far.
H-Worm is VBS not .NET Unless someone created VBS.NET and didn't tell me
AV##### and Dsplit is also another very famous method used to FUD malwares
My point is if you're simply using pre-made tools and techniques to create and try to stop malware being detected, you're not going to get far.
this is all-about script-kiddies, but if the plan is to quickly infect a specific machine to retrieves some datas then leave it; it is enough.
not all behavior based detection won't care about crypters there are some that care that will most likely stop it before it happensExcept that behavior based detection won't care about crypters. Quite frankly adding a crypter will make it a lot more likely the file will trigger an alert in many cases .
Since you clearly have a hard time figuring out the implied meaning of what I said, please let me spell it out for you:not all behavior based detection won't care about crypters there are some that care that will most likely stop it before it happens
can you next time be a little clear about itSince you clearly have a hard time figuring out the implied meaning of what I said, please let me spell it out for you:
Behavior blockers can't be bypassed using crypters. It doesn't matter how a malware is encrypted or obfuscated, as both only change the physical appearance of the file but not what it does on a system (the later being the only thing any behavior blocker cares about). In fact, using a crypter or obfuscator is a huge red flag for any behavior blocker so trying to hide your malware using any of these techniques will make behavior based detection more likely. This is especially true for all crypters and obfuscators that implement "run PE" behavior.
Your words are true, but there are serious gaps have been exposed in the blocker behavior in emsisoftSince you clearly have a hard time figuring out the implied meaning of what I said, please let me spell it out for you:
Behavior blockers can't be bypassed using crypters. It doesn't matter how a malware is encrypted or obfuscated, as both only change the physical appearance of the file but not what it does on a system (the later being the only thing any behavior blocker cares about). In fact, using a crypter or obfuscator is a huge red flag for any behavior blocker so trying to hide your malware using any of these techniques will make behavior based detection more likely. This is especially true for all crypters and obfuscators that implement "run PE" behavior.
Since you clearly have a hard time figuring out the implied meaning of what I said, please let me spell it out for you:
Behavior blockers can't be bypassed using crypters. It doesn't matter how a malware is encrypted or obfuscated, as both only change the physical appearance of the file but not what it does on a system (the later being the only thing any behavior blocker cares about). In fact, using a crypter or obfuscator is a huge red flag for any behavior blocker so trying to hide your malware using any of these techniques will make behavior based detection more likely. This is especially true for all crypters and obfuscators that implement "run PE" behavior.
"Behavior blockers can't be bypassed using crypters" noSince you clearly have a hard time figuring out the implied meaning of what I said, please let me spell it out for you:
Behavior blockers can't be bypassed using crypters. It doesn't matter how a malware is encrypted or obfuscated, as both only change the physical appearance of the file but not what it does on a system (the later being the only thing any behavior blocker cares about). In fact, using a crypter or obfuscator is a huge red flag for any behavior blocker so trying to hide your malware using any of these techniques will make behavior based detection more likely. This is especially true for all crypters and obfuscators that implement "run PE" behavior.
Unfortunately, there are many sites offering these services for free and there are free courses on how to skipping any protection programYou are wrong my friend. We are in 2014, the hackers keep progressing, and search new systems to bypass all new security possibilities and 98% of crypters sold for less than 5$ can bypass much of behavior systems of anti-virus that you can see on VirusTotal (populars). I have seen myself a live bypass of Comodo firewall and sandbox in less than 3 minutes of codes and changes.
With 30$ you can bypass ALL security solutions on VirusTotal list.
In our actual time, the crypters manipulate the file and behaviors. And it's not only "appearance" change, like in the old time.
It's not a dream, it's the reality. That's why with Tiranium we keep progressing and communicate with some hackers to be able to block all new
technics
that they discover.
The security solutions in our actual time, update them security one time per year.
The hackers need only 1 month ~ to found a fail in the security.
I hope it's clear to understand, sorry for my english.
Best Regards
Unfortunately, most of the security companies that know the truth and ignore them and have already raised the subject of this particular forum in Kaspersky were closed subject and transformative link to another, I have been ignored
Which is not a design bypass but an implementation issue. There will always be implementation issues. Quite frankly, there are implementation issues in every product out there. That doesn't mean that behavior blockers as a concept are weak though. By the way, if you stumble upon a particular implementation issue in one of our products, feel free to contact me.Your words are true, but there are serious gaps have been exposed in the blocker behavior in emsisoft
You are aware, that VirusTotal does not include any behavior blocker results in their detections, right? They solely perform an on-demand scan of files and for files that look particularly interesting throw them into the Cuckoo sandbox cluster.You are wrong my friend. We are in 2014, the hackers keep progressing, and search new systems to bypass all new security possibilities and 98% of crypters sold for less than 5$ can bypass much of behavior systems of anti-virus that you can see on VirusTotal (populars).
Sure, feel free to send me the sample via PM.Test proves you
Do you want to try it yourself Sampler?
Which is not a design bypass but an implementation issue. There will always be implementation issues. Quite frankly, there are implementation issues in every product out there. That doesn't mean that behavior blockers as a concept are weak though. By the way, if you stumble upon a particular implementation issue in one of our products, feel free to contact me.