File scan report
Verdict Safe
Is centiped.
None of the 64 antivirus engines that checked it flagged this small ZIP archive, and a sandbox run recorded no malicious activity, no network contacts and no dropped files.
Read the whole reasonShow less
Moderate evidence · No engine flags it, but no publisher signature confirms who made it.
Nothing here requires removal or blocking; keep your security software enabled and open the archive only if you were expecting it. If it arrived unexpectedly, confirm with the sender through another channel first.
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 10
- Code signing Not applicable
- Test run Completed
- First seen 10y 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 — 64 of 74 returned results and all of them were clean, including 18 major antivirus engines. A sandbox run showed no malicious verdict, no network traffic and no dropped files, and the public malware databases hold no entry for it. It has been circulating in modest volume since 2016, which fits an ordinary, long-lived archive rather than a targeted lure.
The archive arrives with no detections at all: 64 of the 64 antivirus engines that checked it returned a result and every one of them left it alone, including 18 of the most reliable engines, so there is no signature, family label or rule-based flag to weigh. The malware reference databases and community rule sets also return nothing, and no public sample listing exists for this exact file. The sandbox run produced no malicious verdict, no network contacts, no files it created and no injected processes; the only registry activity recorded is ordinary Internet Explorer toolbar bookkeeping, which is normal machine activity rather than anything the archive itself set up. The file has been seen by 23 separate sources over 72 submissions since April 2016, which is the profile of an old, widely circulated archive rather than a freshly seeded lure. Two checks were not available — the archive's contents were never unpacked for our own inspection, and the reputation of contacted hosts could not be cross-referenced — so the result rests on broad engine agreement plus the absence of any hostile behaviour in the run, not on a content review.
What We Detected
The file is a small ZIP archive of about 8.7 KB. Across the antivirus engines, 64 of the 64 antivirus engines that checked it produced a result and none flagged it — no trojan, adware, packer or generic suspicion label from any engine, including the 18 highest-trust ones. Community malware rule sets, the open sample-sharing databases and the known-software reference sets all returned no match for this exact file.
Threat Behavior
A sandbox run executed the archive. It recorded no malicious verdict, made no network connections, started no programs it started of interest, dropped no files and left no injected processes behind. The only registry entries logged were Internet Explorer toolbar statistics values, which Windows writes during ordinary browsing activity. There are no persistence entries and no distinct program markers attributable to the file. Because the run produced no hostile artefact, there is nothing for the engine results to contradict.
Reputation and History
This archive was first seen on Apr 9, 2016 and has since been submitted 72 times from 23 separate sources — modest but steady circulation consistent with an old, unremarkable file rather than a freshly distributed lure. No researcher annotations and no prior staff review exist on this hash.
Limitations
Our own static inspection of the archive's contents was not performed, so the files inside were not individually unpacked and examined. The reputation of any hosts the content might reference was also not available. Both are gaps in coverage rather than findings against the file, and nothing in the available evidence contradicts the clean engine result.
What To Do Now
No action is needed beyond ordinary caution: keep your antivirus protection enabled and treat archives from unknown senders with the usual care. If you did not expect this archive, confirm the sender through a separate channel before opening it.
Where this verdict could be wrong2 caveats
- The archive's contents were not unpacked in our own static analysis, so the clean engine result reflects what the engines could see of the ZIP rather than an inspection of every file inside it.
- No network contacts were observed and the contacted-host reputation check was not available, so there is no positive confirmation about where anything inside might reach.
These are the assessment's weak points. If you believe one applies to your file, report the verdict and we'll re-review it.
- None of the 64 antivirus engines that checked it flagged the archive, with 64 returning results and 18 major antivirus engines among them.
- The sandbox run produced no malicious verdict, no network contacts, no dropped files and no injected processes.
- No entry in the public malware databases or community rule sets for this exact file.
- Steady circulation since April 2016 — 72 submissions from 23 separate sources — consistent with an old, ordinary archive.
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 1 isolated test; no test environment rated what it did as risky.
Test run summary
Capture complete- 1isolated sandbox run
- 0spawned processes
- 0network contacts
- 0filesystem & mutex artifacts
Includes every process, file, registry and network entry.
Show the technical evidenceChapter 04
Technical details
None of the 64 antivirus engines that checked it flag it.
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.
File fingerprint
- Last analyzed
- Nov 6, 2026, 11:18 PM UTC
- SHA-256
5c7f98d0b47a867093795f94768d1e9eea03659629fb926fa036e10fa00fe0fe- SHA-1
7e88eb8974be04bb3479c9d34afd3f288992f3a7- MD5
aad6b18192f9636a3d7c87b908700cfc
About this file
centiped.zip is a ZIP file of 8.7 kB.
- Type and size
- ZIP · 8.7 kB
- Signer
- Not applicable
- First seen
- Apr 9, 2016On VirusTotal.
- Submitted by
- 23 distinct sources
First scanned
Includes every engine result (74) 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 centiped.zip safe?
What is centiped.zip?
How many antivirus engines detected centiped.zip?
What is the SHA-256 hash of centiped.zip?
Is it safe to open or extract centiped.zip?
How up to date is this analysis of centiped.zip?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.