File scan report
Verdict Safe
Is setgaleen21103 (1). exe safe? Yes, no threats found.
Only 1 of the 69 antivirus engines that checked it flagged this installer, while higher-trust engines and completed sandbox runs supplied no corroborating malware evidence.
Read the whole reasonShow less
Moderate evidence · No engine flags it, but no publisher signature confirms who made it.
Good practice2 tips
We found nothing harmful in this file.
Run it only if it came from the developer's own website or an official app store.
Keep your antivirus and Windows updates switched on.
No scanner can promise a file is 100% safe.
Antivirus results
1 of 69 flagged
- Flagged 1
- No detection 68
- No result 6
- Code signing Unsigned
- Test run Completed
- First seen 5mo ago
Chapter 02
Why we think so
3 points against it and 5 in its favour, checked against the scan evidence.
The reasoning behind this verdict
APEX was the sole detector among 75 engines, and none of the higher-trust engines flagged the executable. Completed sandbox runs showed installer activity without a malicious verdict, named injection target, hostile network contact, or other high-risk behavior, making the isolated detection likely a false positive.
The antivirus result is dominated by one less reliable generic detection from APEX, while all reporting higher-trust engines remained silent. Completed sandbox runs showed the executable installing and launching GraphicsGale components, with no malicious sandbox verdict or named injection target. The mapping is not supported by an injection artefact and therefore does not establish process injection. No malware-specific community rules, public malware-sample listing, malicious child, packing, or brand conflict reinforced the detection. The unsigned status reduces provenance assurance, but it does not outweigh the broad lack of corroboration.
What We Detected
APEX was the only engine to flag the executable: 1 of the 69 antivirus engines that checked it. None of the reporting higher-trust engines, including Kaspersky, ESET, BitDefender, Fortinet and Avast, produced a detection, and no engine identified a real malware family.
Threat Behavior
Completed sandbox runs showed installation activity associated with GraphicsGale and returned no malicious verdict. A T1055 technique label appeared, but no target process was recorded, so the evidence does not demonstrate process injection. The only observed IP contact was identified as analysis-environment background traffic rather than sample activity. No malicious child, persistence indicator, packing, malware-specific rule, or public malware-sample listing provided corroboration.
What To Do Now
The isolated APEX result is most consistent with a false positive. Keep security software enabled and, if provenance matters, obtain the installer again from the software publisher's official distribution channel before running it.
Where this verdict could be wrong3 caveats
- APEX labeled the executable malicious, although no higher-trust engine corroborated that result.
- The executable is unsigned, so publisher identity cannot provide an additional authenticity check.
- A complete reputation check was not saved for the observed network address, although that address was identified as analysis-environment background traffic.
These are the assessment's weak points. If you believe one applies to your file, report the verdict and we'll re-review it.
- Only 1 of the 69 antivirus engines that checked it flagged the file, and the sole detector was less reliable.
- All reporting higher-trust engines produced no detection.
- Completed sandbox runs returned no malicious verdict and recorded no named injection target.
- No malware-specific rules or public malware-sample database entries matched the hash.
- The executable was not identified as packed and contained no high-entropy code.
- The executable has no verified publisher signature.
- APEX produced a generic malicious detection.
- No complete host-reputation result was saved for the observed address.
6 sources checked · 5 complete · 1 not needed or not applicable. See every source
Chapter 03
What it did in our test
It ran in 4 isolated tests; no test environment rated what it did as risky.
Test run summary
Capture complete- 4isolated sandbox runs
- 10sandbox rule tags
- 6spawned processes
- 0network contacts
- 32filesystem & mutex artifacts
Includes the sandbox verdicts, 10 mapped techniques, every process, file, registry and network entry and 10 dropped files.
Show the technical evidenceChapter 04
Technical details
1 of the 69 antivirus engines that checked it flags it; no publisher signature.
Sources checked
Every check behind this verdict
6 sources checked · 5 complete · 1 not needed or not applicable. Complete means the check returned a usable result; it does not mean the file is safe.
Engines that flagged it 1
The saved verdict treats these detections as likely false positives.
- APEXMalicious
File fingerprint
- Last analyzed
- Oct 22, 2026, 10:49 AM UTC
- SHA-256
33529d316fc132a61078172eb9e80257c69dbc8c3f316d54556da70b05996bfd- SHA-1
8df7a2ff39e11c2b4826cbd40a504a9a9204b82e- MD5
52318df5106d3265136e3d8c206ab04e
About this file
setgaleen21103 (1).exe says it is GraphicsGale Setup (GraphicsGale), 3.5 MB.
- Claims to be
- GraphicsGale Setup (GraphicsGale)From the file's own version information, written by whoever built it.
- Type and size
- Win32 EXE · 3.5 MB
- Signer
- UnsignedNo code signature.
- First seen
- May 21, 2026On VirusTotal.
- Submitted by
- 160 distinct sources
- Packer
- None detected
- Entropy
- 6.16 of 8
First scanned
Includes every engine result (75), 1 matched signature rule, PE section entropy and packers and how widely the file has been seen.
Show the technical evidenceChapter 05
Questions & answers
Short answers to the 6 questions people ask most about this file.
Is setgaleen21103 (1).exe safe?
What is setgaleen21103 (1).exe?
How many antivirus engines detected setgaleen21103 (1).exe?
What is the SHA-256 hash of setgaleen21103 (1).exe?
Is it safe to run setgaleen21103 (1).exe?
How up to date is this analysis of setgaleen21103 (1).exe?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.