Thread View: comp.virus
1 messages
1 total messages
Started by Fridrik Skulason
Wed, 04 Nov 1992 09:24
Re: SCAN 95b doesn't find MtE in EXE files (PC)
Author: Fridrik Skulason
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1992 09:24
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1992 09:24
38 lines
1858 bytes
1858 bytes
Stefano_Turci@f0.n462.z9.virnet.bad.se (Stefano Turci) writes: >Well, I converted the files from COM to EXE, and made some scanning >tests with the mentioned programs. >The results were a bit strange, in fact: > F-prot 2.05 > Scan 97 > VirX 2.4 >missed *ALL* the converted files, while Not surprising - what you did was simply to add a new layer of encryption to the files. Of course, the virus could be distributed in this form, and would probably replicate, but all the second (and later) generation copies would be detected normally. I am not at all surprised that my scanner, as well as the others missed the virus - actually, no matter how you had encrypted it, it probably would be missed. >converted files are still able to propagate the virus, so I think the >authors of the "missing-in- action" programs should improve their a-v >packages. 8-) In my case the reson I miss this particular sample is simple. I scan inside LZEXE-compressed files, but only for signatures - that is, I uncompress the virus in memory, and run my scanning engine over it. If I uncompressed to disk, and stripped off the COM/EXE conversion, I would detect it, but it would slow the scanner down considerably. I don't consider it a serious problem - basically it is equivalent to distributing an old virus, with a new encryption wrapper...the original sample will not be found, but all the second generation copies will. - -frisk
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads