Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Inactive Support Threads
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Software
Security Apps
Other security for Windows, Mac, Linux
NoVirusThanks OSArmor
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Andy Ful" data-source="post: 706755" data-attributes="member: 32260"><p>Guys, I think that Andres can cover blocking those files in the way as SRP can do, but <strong>the important question is if he should. </strong>As [USER=65228]@Opcode[/USER] said the chances to use this hole by malware in the wild is very low. Furthermore, I can see some pros of not blocking those files when executed via external file commander.</p><p><strong>It would be useful for Andreas to see what people think about it.</strong><img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite109" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p>Of course, one can imagine the possible way of abusing OSArmor default settings using Office macro to run PowerShell commands and download legitimate portable file commander + some 0-day payloads, and next using that file commander to run those payloads (<strong>scripts, .com, .msi or .scr</strong> files). But it would be simpler to just download the <strong>.exe</strong> payload and execute it using MMC20.Application Com object or WMI object. Yet, there is some danger. Some AVs have decent .exe files protection (like Avast Hardened Aggressive mode) but an average detection of .msi files (for example).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Andy Ful, post: 706755, member: 32260"] Guys, I think that Andres can cover blocking those files in the way as SRP can do, but [B]the important question is if he should. [/B]As [USER=65228]@Opcode[/USER] said the chances to use this hole by malware in the wild is very low. Furthermore, I can see some pros of not blocking those files when executed via external file commander. [B]It would be useful for Andreas to see what people think about it.[/B]:) Of course, one can imagine the possible way of abusing OSArmor default settings using Office macro to run PowerShell commands and download legitimate portable file commander + some 0-day payloads, and next using that file commander to run those payloads ([B]scripts, .com, .msi or .scr[/B] files). But it would be simpler to just download the [B].exe[/B] payload and execute it using MMC20.Application Com object or WMI object. Yet, there is some danger. Some AVs have decent .exe files protection (like Avast Hardened Aggressive mode) but an average detection of .msi files (for example). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top