+- Hack Forums (https://hackforums.net)
+-- Forum: Hacks, Exploits, and Various Discussions (https://hackforums.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=45)
+--- Forum: Grayhat • Purple Team • Hybrid Security (https://hackforums.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=449)
+---- Forum: Beginner Hacking (https://hackforums.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+---- Thread: Why you shouldn't scan with virustotal.com [MUST READ] (/showthread.php?tid=761605)
Why you shouldn't scan with virustotal.com [MUST READ] - мεяcү - Oct 23, 2010
So simply I saw a lots of threats of new crypters made by our members in wich some freaking n00bs downloaded the crypter and scanned the files on http://www.virustotal.com/ ... and then they got flamed coz they just made the crypter detected or fully detected. So I am gonna explain it to you all why NOT to scan with http://www.virustotal.com/
emm I am gonna make this quick and simply so you can understand it.
If you scan everything with virustotal, your lovely server or crypter will get detected in like 100/1 time faster than normaly scanned with novirusthanks.
If you scan everything with novirusthanks, your lovely server or crypter will stay FUD for a longer time.
So to all of you wich didn't know, put ur brain back in ur head and turn it on AND USE http://vscan.novirusthanks.org/ BTW make sure you have enabled "Do not disturbe"
THANKS
* - poild - Oct 23, 2010
It's more of like a, "No shit, Sherlock" message.. Yet people do it.
* - -mothered- - Oct 23, 2010
Nice guide, but to be honest and In my opinion, I don't trust any online virus scan engines.
Who knows what happens behind closed doors.
* - GoldenPhe0nix - Oct 23, 2010
Also you should check the 'do not distribute' checkbox before making a scan at novirusthankyou
Otherwise your file will be sent to antivirus labs for analysis and it would soon be Fully Detectable.
* - GetScraped - Oct 23, 2010
We all know this, Jesus Christ.
* - мεяcү - Oct 23, 2010
(Oct 23, 2010 04:48 PM)mothered Wrote: Nice guide, but to be honest and In my opinion, I don't trust any online virus scan engines.yea +1 on that mate
Who knows what happens behind closed doors.
(Oct 23, 2010 04:56 PM)GetScraped Wrote: We all know this, Jesus Christ.
But there are still a lot people doing it, so no you all don't know -.-'
* - Zoobiker - Oct 23, 2010
This should be stickied😉
* - мεяcү - Oct 24, 2010
DELETE THIS MESSAGE PLEASE
* - Diamond Supply Company - Oct 31, 2010
pEdObEaR_ Knows what he's talking about, taught me EVERYTHING.
* - :'D - Oct 31, 2010
I think people scan the actual crypter with VT (rather than the stub). IMO, they should do this because there are more virus scanners on there.
* - iBRSteven - Oct 31, 2010
How did you determine 100/1?
* - Sudo - Oct 31, 2010
This is true. Novirusthanks is much better.
* - мεяcү - Oct 31, 2010
(Oct 31, 2010 04:45 PM)iBRSteven Wrote: How did you determine 100/1?
I didn't but how should we put that in theyr heads? I mean bout the scanning at vt and detecting the crypters / servers
* - hacc - Oct 31, 2010
(Oct 31, 2010 04:39 PM):D Wrote: I think people scan the actual crypter with VT (rather than the stub). IMO, they should do this because there are more virus scanners on there.
I do think most people use VT for scanning programs that might be infected (which I do).
Its a better idea because the VT scanner is better, plus I like the fact that if it is infected, the asswipe who backdoored it won't have it UD for long.
* - sporetime - Nov 7, 2010
(Oct 31, 2010 07:49 PM)hac Wrote: I do think most people use VT for scanning programs that might be infected (which I do).
Its a better idea because the VT scanner is better, plus I like the fact that if it is infected, the asswipe who backdoored it won't have it UD for long.
Agreed. I just use it to scan stuff to check if its infected.