[Splodge0007]

OP trying to act as if he knows what he's talking about after the fiasco in the protection thread...

95% polymorphic.. you have to be fucking kidding me.

[pr3fix]

I don't really believe that you've achieved polymorphism. From what I've seen, at least according to your posts that you make in programming / coding section it's quite easy to conclude that you're not quite capable of such thing.

But who knows. However, I wish you good luck with whatever you're trying to do . :)

[0verdose]

Looking pretty sexy so far.

No Extension spoofer?

[Ludakrishna]

"Polymorphic .NET Crypter."
"its still polymorphic. Its just not 100% polymorphic. "

[van1lle]

Okay this not ment as flaming, bashing .NET or trolling.
This is simply a criticism you have to deal with.

The stub is 95% unique. Its not TRUE polymorphism, but its as close as you can get with .NET.

Why do you claim it as Polymorphic when it is not?
There is no gray zone between polymorphic or not. Since your decrypter or what else do you have to decrypt the "stub", "runPE" or anything else is not mutatig each time, it is NOT polymorphic. It is only dynamically reencrypted each time. The anti-virus system won't compare the encrypted data. It looks for something like a decrypter.

I'm not going to share how I do this, as its a private method I developed.

Such a thing has been released for free in the .NET section and is not hard to create. I will edit this as soon as i can find the link to the thread.

What is good in my eyes:
- The GUI. It doesn't affect the functionality of the crypter though.

~van1lle

[Blizzard]

This is reactor theme given by someone on the vbsection.

[Mr. Anderson]

Is your girlfriend pregnant ? Yes or No are the only answers you can give to that, exactly like in this situation. There is nothing like 90 % pregnant as well as there is nothing like 90 % polymorphic.

You can't apply yes-no concepts to this. Its still 95% polymorphic because most of the code is being moved and replaced, just not all of it. So you can't say its not either. But I'll edit the thread title.

[Нyреrion]

Think about it... TRUE polymorphism isn't even possible in this context because at the end of the day, the byte still has to suspend a legitimate file and inject itself into it, and this isn't possible if it's polymorphic unless you had 100's of FUD RunPE's...

[Ludakrishna]

Think about it... TRUE polymorphism isn't even possible in this context because at the end of the day, the byte still has to suspend a legitimate file and inject itself into it, and this isn't possible if it's polymorphic unless you had 100's of FUD RunPE's...

who even uses runpe's nowadays? its a lame ass method from 2004. 😏😏😏

[Нyреrion]

who even uses runpe's nowadays? its a lame ass method from 2004. 😏😏😏

Umm, how about every single crypter on HF?

[van1lle]

You can't apply yes-no concepts to this. Its still 95% polymorphic because most of the code is being moved and replaced, just not all of it. So you can't say its not either. But I'll edit the thread title.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_vi...rphic_code

Polymorphic code
[...] In the case of polymorphic viruses, however, this decryption module is also modified on each infection. A well-written polymorphic virus therefore has no parts which remain identical between infections, making it very difficult to detect directly using signatures.

//EDIT:
Also, pr0t0typ3 is correct with is example: 95% pregnant. Either she is or she isn't!

[Ludakrishna]

Umm, how about every single crypter on HF?

exactly, just goes to show that nobody on HF is capable of coding an alternate method. they would rather use a lame outdated method that I doubt any of these crypter coders even understand. 🤝

[Io0oI]

polymorphism refers to self replicating it has nothing to do with obfuscation,you will get a totaly different structure,a new variant,yes some guys obfuscat a code or crypt it and then call it a "full private legit polymorfic system",wish it is not.Adding some junk code or coding a crypting program has nothing to do with coding a self-crypting program.imagine making a machine that will execute one order and only one,and making a machine that can take decisions and execute different orders. It is totaly different.this is why we call it polymorphic and not monomorphic

btw,it is very hard to acheive polymophisme using hight level programming languages,your choice is assembly,and if you are too lazy then you can use C with some inline assembly.
you cant do this with VB
.net ,just forget about it

[Mr. Anderson]

Fine, I got rid of the polymorphic part, I'll just say that each stub is 95% unique. Way to much trouble.

---

This is reactor theme given by someone on the vbsection.

Yes, when I start selling all credits will be given.

[wacked3]

Thank you.
Now lets start that all over again.
How did you estimate the difference? Did it include anything but your code? If so it is flawed and you shouldn't advertise it that way because essentially you are lying.