Is ClipboardTextHealthView.exe safe?
Thirty of 75 engines flagged this executable, while high-trust Convagent detections and observed process-injection and defense-impairment techniques indicate substantial downloader risk.
The executable drew detections from 30 of 75 engines, including 11 high-trust engines, with repeated Convagent or downloader naming. A completed sandbox run also mapped activity to process injection, privilege escalation, and impairment of defenses, while its UX Engineering signature has no trusted-publisher or historical support.
53d257cda7d32eae05…646764cfe660b2Recommended next actions
Before running
Do not run it. Delete this file from the device, then empty the Recycle Bin or Trash.
If you already ran it
Disconnect from the internet, start a full or offline antivirus scan, then secure important accounts from a clean device.
Intelligence
The saved assessment, checked against the scan evidence and recorded coverage.
The reasoning behind this verdict
This section explains the evidence supporting the verdict and keeps conflicting or missing signals visible.
The executable drew detections from 30 of 75 engines, including 11 high-trust engines, with repeated Convagent or downloader naming. A completed sandbox run also mapped activity to process injection, privilege escalation, and impairment of defenses, while its UX Engineering signature has no trusted-publisher or historical support.
The strongest evidence is the breadth and quality of antivirus detection: 30 of 75 engines flagged the sample, including 11 high-trust engines. Kaspersky and TrendMicro-HouseCall identify Convagent, while Microsoft and several others report downloader, trojan, or high-confidence malicious patterns. Runtime evidence from one sandbox includes T1055, T1548, and T1562.001, which materially reinforces the engine findings despite the absence of an explicit sandbox verdict. The UX Engineering signature is not tied to a curated publisher and has no sample history, so it does not provide meaningful assurance. Family labels differ and five high-trust engines did not detect the file, making Convagent the best-supported attribution rather than a definitive identity. The observed no complete contacted-host reputation result was available or hostile because no complete contacted-host reputation result is available.
What We Detected
Thirty of 75 antivirus engines flagged the executable, including 11 high-trust engines. Kaspersky and TrendMicro-HouseCall identify Convagent, while Microsoft reports Wacapew and other engines use generic Agent, MalwareX, or trojan labels. This disagreement limits exact family attribution, but the broad high-trust detection pattern strongly supports harmful functionality.
Threat Behavior
One completed sandbox run mapped activity to T1055 process injection, T1548 privilege escalation, and T1562.001 impairment of defenses. The file also contacted the IP address 162.159.36.2 directly; however, no complete host-reputation result is available, so that connection cannot independently establish command-and-control activity. No dropped files or persistence indicators were recorded in the saved run.
What To Do Now
Do not run the executable. Quarantine or remove it with endpoint protection kept enabled, and if it has already executed, isolate the system, perform a full scan, and review process, account, and network activity for compromise.
Where this verdict could be wrong4 caveats
- Five tier-1 engines reported no detection, including BitDefender, and engines.tier1FamilyConsensus.strong=false, so the precise family attribution remains uncertain.
- behaviour.hasMaliciousSandboxVerdict=false, and the single completed sandbox run recorded no dropped files or persistence indicators.
- externalIntel.yaraify.ruleCount=0, externalIntel.malwareBazaar.hit=false, and externalIntel.circl.hit=false, although absence from those sources does not outweigh the engine and behavioral evidence.
- Fortinet and several Convagent detections characterize the sample as riskware or an application rather than unequivocal malware.
These are the assessment's weak points. If you believe one applies to your file, report the verdict and we'll re-review it.
- Five high-trust engines reported no detection
- No malicious sandbox verdict was recorded
- No dropped files or persistence indicators were saved
- No CIRCL, MalwareBazaar, or YARAify hit was present
- brandMismatch.detected was not reported
- 30/75 antivirus detections
- 11 high-trust engine detections
- Repeated Convagent and downloader labels
- Observed T1055 process-injection mapping
- Observed T1548 privilege-escalation mapping
- Observed T1562.001 defense-impairment mapping
Keep endpoint protection enabled and quarantine the file rather than opening it. If it already ran, isolate the device and conduct a full endpoint and credential-compromise investigation.
Coverage & freshness
Complete means the check returned a usable result. It does not mean the file is safe.
Antivirus
Complete30 of 75 engines flagged the file.
Sandbox
Complete1 isolated runtime environment contributed observations.
Network
Partial1 runtime contact was observed without a completed reputation cross-check.
YARA
Complete2 signature or behavior rules matched.
External intel
Complete3 of 3 independent reference sources completed.
Behavior
Plain-English impact first, then the observed runtime evidence.
Runtime flight recorder
Capture complete- 1isolated sandbox run
- 10MITRE ATT&CK techniques
- 2spawned processes
- 1network contacts
- 0filesystem & mutex artifacts
What this file does
Observed actions and their security significance
High concern: Injected code into another process, a technique that can conceal execution.
High concern: Used an input-capture technique that can record credentials or keystrokes.
High concern: Attempted to impair or bypass security controls.
Moderate concern: Contained obfuscated or packed code that makes inspection harder.
Moderate concern: Communicated over a common application protocol; malware can use this for command-and-control.
Note: Listed running processes; both legitimate software and malware may do this.
These are observed capabilities from an isolated analysis. A technique does not prove malicious intent on its own, and the file never ran on your device.
Threat context
How downloaders work
This file is a delivery vehicle. On its own it can look small and harmless, but its job is to quietly pull down and install the REAL payload — often a stealer, ransomware, or bot — from a server the attacker controls.
Bottom line:Because the dangerous part arrives later, early scans can look cleaner than the threat really is.
Attack story
Runtime observations grouped by analysis stage. Arrows organize the stages; they do not claim chronology or causality.
Input file
The submitted object
- FileObserved
ClipboardTextHealthView.exe
53d257cda7d32eae057a03648d15bc78ad84b4ca7dd90a763a646764cfe660b2
01Uploaded file
Processes
Runtime execution
- ProcessObserved
Observed process
"C:\Users\<USER>\Desktop\NVIDIA_Smooth_Motion_Setup.exe"
02Isolated runtime analysis - ProcessObserved
Observed process
"C:\Users\user\Desktop\NVIDIA_Smooth_Motion_Setup.exe"
03Isolated runtime analysis - +1 more recorded observation in Analyst mode
Network
Hosts contacted
- Contacted hostObserved
162.159.36.2
Contact observed during runtime.
04Isolated runtime analysis
4 recorded facts from one runtime window. Every fact remains independently traceable in Analyst mode.
What this file did when executed
This file was detonated in 1 sandbox and its runtime behaviour was observed.
Adversary techniques mapped to the MITRE ATT&CK framework.
- 162.159.36.2
Detection & Forensics
Consensus, attribution, signatures, code structure, prevalence, and identity.
Evidence integrity
Chain of custody for the facts preserved in this report.
- 2rule hits recorded
- 30 / 75engines flagged
- 10sources in submission history
Why these facts are shown
Each statement identifies whether it was directly recorded or derived from saved scan facts.
- 01
1 high-confidence signature or behavior rule matched this file.
Verdict inputView chapterProvenanceDerivedSourceSignature and behavior rulesObserved at - 02
30 of 75 antivirus engines flagged the file, including alibabacloud and Antiy-AVL.
Verdict inputView chapterProvenanceObservedSourceAntivirus analysisObserved at - 03
The hash has been submitted 10 times from 10 sources.
ProvenanceDerivedSourceSaved report factsObserved at - 04
Scanned file: ClipboardTextHealthView.exe — 53d257cda7d32eae057a03648d15bc78ad84b4ca7dd90a763a646764cfe660b2
ProvenanceObservedSourceUploaded fileObserved at - 05
Observed process — "C:\Users\<USER>\Desktop\NVIDIA_Smooth_Motion_Setup.exe"
ProvenanceObservedSourceIsolated runtime analysisObserved at - 06
Observed process — "C:\Users\user\Desktop\NVIDIA_Smooth_Motion_Setup.exe"
ProvenanceObservedSourceIsolated runtime analysisObserved at - 07
Contacted host: 162.159.36.2 — Contact observed during runtime.
ProvenanceObservedSourceIsolated runtime analysisObserved at
Detection sources at a glance
Category: downloader
MalwareBazaar, YARAify, and CIRCL hashlookup completed and returned no entries for this hash.
Signatures and behavior heuristics
A community signature or high-severity behavioral heuristic matched. Signatures identify known patterns; heuristics are strong leads but are not proof on their own.
The saved runtime evidence maps this activity to MITRE T1055 (Process Injection). The mapping supports possible process injection, but it does not prove the exact injection method or the operator's intent.
Evidence"C:\Users\<USER>\Desktop\NVIDIA_Smooth_Motion_Setup.exe"The sample contacted an external IP address directly and no application domain was recorded. Direct-IP traffic also occurs in legitimate installers and infrastructure, so this is supporting context only and requires corroboration from host reputation and other runtime evidence.
Evidence162.159.36.2
30 of 75 engines flagged this file
View all 75 engine results
Section entropy & packers
No high-entropy executable section or known packer signature was detected. Data and resource sections can still have high entropy without indicating packed code.
How widely this file has been seen
Moderate prevalence — neither rare nor common. No strong prior applies.
Fingerprint and provenance
- File name
- ClipboardTextHealthView.exe
- Format
- Win32 EXE
- Code signing
- Signature not verified: UX Engineering
- Size
- 3.3 MB
- Last analyzed
- Sep 24, 2026, 9:14 PM UTC
53d257cda7d32eae057a03648d15bc78ad84b4ca7dd90a763a646764cfe660b2Safety & FAQ
Complete recovery guidance and answers for the next decision.
What to do now
This file is dangerous. Treat it as harmful and remove it.
- Recovery step 01
Don't run this file. Delete this file from the device, then empty the Recycle Bin or Trash.
- Recovery step 02
If you already ran it, disconnect from the internet and start with a full antivirus scan or Microsoft Defender Offline scan. If compromise is suspected or the problem persists, use a reputable second-opinion scanner and follow incident-recovery or clean-reinstall guidance.
- Recovery step 03
From a different, clean device, change the passwords on your important accounts (email and banking first) and turn on two-factor authentication.
- Recovery step 04
Get a fresh copy from the developer's official site or an official app store.
Safety FAQ
Direct answers grounded in the saved verdict and evidence in this report.
Is ClipboardTextHealthView.exe malware?
What is ClipboardTextHealthView.exe?
How many antivirus engines detected ClipboardTextHealthView.exe?
I already downloaded and ran ClipboardTextHealthView.exe — what should I do?
How do I remove ClipboardTextHealthView.exe?
What kind of malware is ClipboardTextHealthView.exe?
Is ClipboardTextHealthView.exe digitally signed?
What is the SHA-256 hash of ClipboardTextHealthView.exe?
How up to date is this analysis of ClipboardTextHealthView.exe?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.