3 ms·
> they started detecting completely clean keygens and cracks as well as "hacking tools" and demoscene productions. AFAIK this is usually a side effect of self-
by boomlinde 6y ago
> they started detecting completely clean keygens and cracks as well as "hacking tools" and demoscene productions.
AFAIK this is usually a side effect of self-unpacking compressed executables, as produced by EXE packers. They have a property that's been useful to malware authors: they obfuscate the code. To de-obfuscate, you have to unpack, which some anti-virus vendors actually do for executables produced by common compression tools like UPX. For certain types of demoscene productions, however, a popular tool like UPX won't do if you can shave another few bytes using a more obscure packer that AV software are unlikely to have unpackers for. Once malware authors start using those same packers you'll get false positives based on signatures that are likely common to all software using them.
- yjftsjthsd-h 6y agoNo, because they're flagged as "hacking tools" explicitly -they're not being misidentified.
- AYBABTME 6y agoHow do AV software identify these "signatures"? Does it look for known strings, or does it do something smarter with some sort of behavior matching?
- saagarjha 6y agoUsually both. They check known malware signatures and also look for suspicious behavior.