![]() |
|
[Community Alert] Asylum Crypter = Diverse Crypter - Printable Version +- Hack Forums (https://hackforums.net) +-- Forum: Marketplace (https://hackforums.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=105) +--- Forum: Bazaar (https://hackforums.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=450) +---- Forum: Marketplace Discussions (https://hackforums.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=163) +---- Thread: [Community Alert] Asylum Crypter = Diverse Crypter (/showthread.php?tid=3908950) |
Asylum Crypter = Diverse Crypter - Tastylicous - Dec 5, 2013 Sales-Thread of Diverse: https://hackforums.net/showthread.php?tid=3844073 Hey guys, today I will show you how the "new" Diverse Crypter is the same as the "old" Aslyum Crypter. As a few of you may know, Asylum Crypter's seller/owner recently got banned. So what I believe happened is he gave the source to someone else to sell... That new crypter is now called Diverse Crypter. I had to deobfuscate Asylum Crypter, so there are some differences, but ultimately, the same code. I could not post all the images directly because of this forum. Here are the clues: 1. Their Terms of Services are almost identical: Diverse Crypter: https://puu.sh/5BXPI.png https://puu.sh/5BXSv.png Asylum Crypter: https://puu.sh/5BXTw.png 2. They are both coded in AutoIT 3. Their builders have almost the same exact code: Diverse Crypter: ![]() Asylum Crypter: ![]() 4. They both have shells that invoke the actual builder in the same exact way: Diverse Crypter: ![]() Asylum Crypter: ![]() 5. They have the same builder decryption method: Diverse Crypter: ![]() Asylum Crypter:
* - Cesar Morales - Dec 5, 2013 Wow, this is pretty disappointing to see this :/ Hopefully this will be resolved soon. -Astro * - Burnzy - Dec 5, 2013 nice catch there thanks for heads up! * - FaggotFlounder - Dec 5, 2013 If you give me the builder I can actually get you the original source in autoIT. * - Tastylicous - Dec 5, 2013 (Dec 5, 2013 05:26 AM)FaggotFlounder Wrote: If you give me the builder I can actually get you the original source in autoIT. Why would I leak any executables? 😧 Anyways, no thanks. * - Ðexter - Dec 5, 2013 Looks like a decent amount of proof, I would report this to staff. Thats what I did last time a user was selling the same product with different name. * - Bat™ - Dec 5, 2013 Wow, nice proof you got man. I think someone has monopoly over HF market. Don't you think ? * - FaggotFlounder - Dec 5, 2013 (Dec 5, 2013 05:27 AM)Tastylicous Wrote: Why would I leak any executables? 😧To improve it is indeed the same as the other. The proof you have right now I'm afraid is not enough. * - Tastylicous - Dec 5, 2013 (Dec 5, 2013 06:03 AM)FaggotFlounder Wrote: To improve it is indeed the same as the other. Not enough in order to do what? If you want the executable get it yourself... * - Mohatu - Dec 5, 2013 (Dec 5, 2013 06:03 AM)FaggotFlounder Wrote: To improve it is indeed the same as the other. I'd actually say it's pretty solid. Also, giving that to you could risk his account. * - Tastylicous - Dec 5, 2013 (Dec 5, 2013 06:07 AM)Mohatu Wrote: I'd actually say it's pretty solid. Also, giving that to you could risk his account. That. I don't want to harm the seller nor the coder by leaking files, I only want to warn the community! * - 1n9i9c7om - Dec 5, 2013 (Dec 5, 2013 05:15 AM)Tastylicous Wrote: 4. They both have shells that invoke the actual builder in the same exact way: I like how they both are like "GetType("<Something>.<Cryptername>X")", both are ending with a X :D * - Eladictocosy - Dec 5, 2013 lol tastylicous nice catch man miki is hilarious rofl * - Jinying - Dec 5, 2013 That is a nice catch man good job mate. * - Tastylicous - Dec 5, 2013 (Dec 5, 2013 07:46 AM)PBD is bad Wrote: lol tastylicous nice catch man miki is hilarious rofl (Dec 5, 2013 07:51 AM)Jinying Wrote: That is a nice catch man good job mate. Thanks for the replies, I appreciate it 🤝 |