I bet you gonna find similar results with many many other executable files while running that file in an "Enterprise Grade AV with Sandboxing", in case of doubt you should sent the file for Kaspersky, Microsoft, ESET and BitDefender and see what their labs think of the file, it is much more conclusive.
I am not discouraging you to do these amateur analyses, but in a public forum this does more harm than good, some users and visitors will just think that NextDNS is not trustable while you dont have any evidence of that, just a false positive prone Sandbox result.
Sorry had to reread this a few times over....
If you would know how Sandblast works you should know it does more then just using a AI-Scanner! -
In terms of tech behind Checkpoint is Kaspersky current Engine plus the signatures from Checkpoint
The Threat Emulation Executes the File in a Virtual Environment and run's a VirusTotal Reputation check too.
What it did not like is a call to a outside source -> view report page and classifies that as a Trojan.
Of course I have uploaded this file multiple times to checkpoint since I am a partner - So nothing amateur about it! - coz that is normal to distrust a file at first and wait and see what the Vendors say!
What I can report von Sophos Intercept X Adv. with Sophos XG Firewall Sandbox license it outright blocks the file - So Checkpoint and Co. are not to blame there is a reason for that behavior. Yeah I am also a Sophos Engineer / Architect / Partner.
Since the file does not come thru - I can not estimate if Windows Smart-Screen will do something atm and am too lazy to experiment right now.
Best regards
Val.