lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu Dec 15 03:08:00 2005 From: infosecbofh at gmail.com (InfoSecBOFH) Subject: Inside AV engines? I think there have been some good suggestions... repacking for one., But for a pen-test, I think the way you are doing it, disable or even add your dump directly to the don't scan list. Its far easier for a legitimate pen-test. On 12/12/05, Jeroen <jeroen@...et.nl> wrote: > For penetration testing on Wintel system, I often use netcat.exe and stuff > like pwdump. More and more I need to disable anti-virus services before > running the tools to avoid alarms and auto-deletion of the applications. It > works but it isn't an ideal situation since theoretically a network can be > infected while the AV-services are down. Recompiling tools is an option > since the source of many tools I use is available. The question is (before I > burn useless CPU cycles): can someone help me getting info about the inside > of AV engines? Will addition of some rubbish to the code do the trick (-> > other checksum), do I need to change some core code or is it a mission > impossible anyway? Who can help for example getting some useful research > papers on the subject of detecting viruses and how to bypass mechanisms > used? Any help will be appreciated. > > > Greets, > > Jeroen > > > _______________________________________________ > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists