File scan report
Verdict Safe
Is puckman.
None of the 64 antivirus engines that checked it flagged this ZIP archive, and the public reference databases hold no listing or malware rule match for it.
Read the whole reasonShow less
Moderate evidence · No engine flags it, but no publisher signature confirms who made it.
Nothing in the evidence suggests this archive is harmful, so no special action is needed. If you were not expecting it, confirm the source with the sender before extracting, and keep your antivirus protection enabled so the extracted contents are scanned.
Good practice2 tips
We found nothing harmful in this file.
Open it only if you trust the person or website you got it from.
Keep your security software and system updates switched on.
No scanner can promise a file is 100% safe.
Antivirus results
0 of 64 flagged
- Flagged 0
- No detection 64
- No result 11
- Code signing Not applicable
- Test run Not run
- First seen 11y ago
Chapter 02
Why we think so
0 points against it and 4 in its favour, checked against the scan evidence.
The reasoning behind this verdict
No engine flagged this archive, including the 17 high-reliability engines that analysed it, and the sample databases we queried hold no listing or malware-specific rule for it. It has been circulating since August 2015 and has been submitted by 32 separate sources. Nothing in the available evidence points to malicious content.
The archive produced no detections at all: none of the 64 antivirus engines that checked it flagged it, and the 17 high-reliability engines that returned a result all reported it clean. The public sample databases and community rule sets we queried were reachable and returned nothing for this hash. The file is not new — it was first seen on Aug 24, 2015 and has been submitted by 32 distinct sources across 71 submissions, which fits a long-lived, widely shared archive rather than a targeted lure. No brand claim, adversarial name pattern, dropped file or signer conflict is present, and no behaviour rule fired. The archive's contents were not opened by our own analysis and no sandbox run exists, so the picture rests on engine results plus the clean reference-database checks; both point the same way.
What We Detected
This is a small ZIP archive (about 15 KB). None of the 64 antivirus engines that checked it in our network flagged it, and the engines that returned a result — 64 of them, including 17 of the most reliable ones — reported it as clean with no suspicious or unwanted label attached.
Reference and Reputation Checks
The public sample-sharing databases and the community rule sets we queried were all reachable, and none of them holds a listing, a family name or a malware-specific rule match for this file. There is no reputation score and no prior report from our staff or from researchers.
Prevalence and Context
The archive has been in circulation since Aug 24, 2015, and 32 separate sources have submitted it over that time. That pattern is typical of an old, widely passed-around archive rather than something crafted for a single victim. There is no brand impersonation, no misleading double extension or hidden character trick, and no installer behaviour noted.
Limits of This Analysis
The archive was not opened and unpacked by our own analysis and no sandbox run exists for it, so its contents are known only from what the engines reported. The contacted-website reputation check was also not completed. These gaps are why some caution remains appropriate even though every available signal is clean.
What To Do Now
No action is required beyond ordinary care. If you did not expect this archive and cannot identify the sender or the source page, it is still reasonable to confirm with the sender before opening its contents, and to keep your antivirus protection enabled so any file inside is checked as it is extracted.
Where this verdict could be wrong2 caveats
- The archive itself was never opened by our own analysis and no sandbox run exists for it, so the contents are known only through what the engines reported rather than from direct inspection.
- The contacted-host reputation check was not completed, so there is no network reputation result to weigh either way.
These are the assessment's weak points. If you believe one applies to your file, report the verdict and we'll re-review it.
- No engine flagged the archive, including 17 high-reliability engines that analysed it
- No listing in the public sample databases and no malware-specific rule match
- Long-standing distribution: first seen on Aug 24, 2015 with 32 distinct submitters
- No brand impersonation, disguised extension or adversarial name pattern
6 sources checked · 4 complete · 1 not run · 1 not needed or not applicable. See every source
Chapter 03
Technical details
None of the 64 antivirus engines that checked it flag it.
Sources checked
Every check behind this verdict
6 sources checked · 4 complete · 1 not run · 1 not needed or not applicable. Complete means the check returned a usable result; it does not mean the file is safe.
File fingerprint
- Last analyzed
- Nov 6, 2026, 11:35 PM UTC
- SHA-256
394c7a0073f6b342f49b108de93597d368966003c119c609080125ab49bdc1d7- SHA-1
fba66006cd4276cc4c3685e52b256747b628bdd2- MD5
1faf10cc6bcfcb0c87b325e956065adb
About this file
puckman.zip is a ZIP file of 14.9 kB.
- Type and size
- ZIP · 14.9 kB
- Signer
- Not applicable
- First seen
- Aug 24, 2015On VirusTotal.
- Submitted by
- 32 distinct sources
First scanned
Includes every engine result (75) and how widely the file has been seen.
Show the technical evidenceChapter 04
Questions & answers
Short answers to the 6 questions people ask most about this file.
Is puckman.zip safe?
What is puckman.zip?
How many antivirus engines detected puckman.zip?
What is the SHA-256 hash of puckman.zip?
Is it safe to open or extract puckman.zip?
How up to date is this analysis of puckman.zip?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.