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="Deleted member 65228" data-source="post: 717847"><p>[USER=70265]@128BPM[/USER]</p><p></p><p>It could also be possible that dllhost.exe and svchost.exe itself is perfectly fine however they are being affected in-memory, potentially being started up as suspended and being resumed after code injection as [USER=37647]@shmu26[/USER] noted although I think it is rather unlikely because dynamic forking is more prevalent on 32-bit processes and malware authors for the home user market are lazy and often stupid (instability on their samples, well-known anti-reversing techniques, copy-pasted code, etc.) nowadays, it would be easier for one to just inject code into explorer.exe via DLL injection for example... and there are just more interesting targets like csrss.exe on Windows 7. However, probably a good idea not to rule it out.</p><p></p><p><a href="https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/downloads/procdump" target="_blank">ProcDump - Windows Sysinternals</a></p><p></p><p>Next time a flag shows up you can take a memory dump of the flagged processes and send it to me for inspection as well. <strong><em>However bear in mind that it could potentially expose sensitive/personal content in the memory</em></strong> (never say never) so only do so if you feel comfortable with ne helping this way.</p><p></p><p>Honestly, I recon his system is actually perfectly fine. Unless he has been downloading and running near the time of the detections, it was probably a false positive. After all, if he has been using NVT OSArmor for some time now and hasn't been downloading and running close to the time of the detection, then it is likely just a false positive. Otherwise it would be extremely likely in my opinion that: a). the detections can be triggered again; b). the activity would be triggered on startup timing.</p><p></p><p>Also, affecting both svchost.exe and dllhost.exe would be noisier and the goal would be stealth... Another reason why I think it is unlikely. Always a possibility though.</p><p></p><p>There are scanners you can run for things like process hollowing... RunPE detector is one of them. It wouldn't do any harm to give it a go.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Deleted member 65228, post: 717847"] [USER=70265]@128BPM[/USER] It could also be possible that dllhost.exe and svchost.exe itself is perfectly fine however they are being affected in-memory, potentially being started up as suspended and being resumed after code injection as [USER=37647]@shmu26[/USER] noted although I think it is rather unlikely because dynamic forking is more prevalent on 32-bit processes and malware authors for the home user market are lazy and often stupid (instability on their samples, well-known anti-reversing techniques, copy-pasted code, etc.) nowadays, it would be easier for one to just inject code into explorer.exe via DLL injection for example... and there are just more interesting targets like csrss.exe on Windows 7. However, probably a good idea not to rule it out. [URL='https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/downloads/procdump']ProcDump - Windows Sysinternals[/URL] Next time a flag shows up you can take a memory dump of the flagged processes and send it to me for inspection as well. [B][I]However bear in mind that it could potentially expose sensitive/personal content in the memory[/I][/B] (never say never) so only do so if you feel comfortable with ne helping this way. Honestly, I recon his system is actually perfectly fine. Unless he has been downloading and running near the time of the detections, it was probably a false positive. After all, if he has been using NVT OSArmor for some time now and hasn't been downloading and running close to the time of the detection, then it is likely just a false positive. Otherwise it would be extremely likely in my opinion that: a). the detections can be triggered again; b). the activity would be triggered on startup timing. Also, affecting both svchost.exe and dllhost.exe would be noisier and the goal would be stealth... Another reason why I think it is unlikely. Always a possibility though. There are scanners you can run for things like process hollowing... RunPE detector is one of them. It wouldn't do any harm to give it a go. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top
