Is E220 V1.2.exe safe?
Unsigned executable with one low-trust detection and sandbox evidence of process injection plus direct-IP traffic.
One low-trust engine flagged the file while 71 others did not. Sandbox logs show process-injection and defense-evasion techniques, yet no tier-1 consensus or external-intel corroboration exists. The mixed signals place the sample in the suspicious band.
61939bdd63d4613c28…89102ad0598ae8Recommended next actions
Before running
Do not run it until the source and publisher can be verified independently.
If you already ran it
Stop using it, scan the device, and watch for unexpected behavior or security alerts. Get a fresh copy from the developer's official site or an official app store.
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.
One low-trust engine flagged the file while 71 others did not. Sandbox logs show process-injection and defense-evasion techniques, yet no tier-1 consensus or external-intel corroboration exists. The mixed signals place the sample in the suspicious band.
The single malicious label originates from a low-trust engine and is therefore discounted under the onlyLowTrustFlagging rule. However, the sandbox recorded two offensive MITRE techniques (T1055, T1562.001) and direct-IP connections, which are legitimate red flags even without tier-1 detections. Similar-hash history is inconclusive because the imphash matches span both safe and malicious prior verdicts. Medium prevalence and lack of external-intel hits prevent a malicious classification, but the unsigned status and behavioural signals keep the file out of the safe band.
What We Detected
76 engines scanned the sample; only MaxSecure returned a malicious result (Trojan.Malware.300983.susgen). No tier-1 engine flagged the file. The binary is unsigned and carries no code-signing history.
Threat Behavior
One sandbox execution captured MITRE techniques T1055 (Process Injection) and T1562.001 (Impair Defenses). The sample also contacted five external IP addresses without domain names. No dropped children or persistence mechanisms were recorded.
What To Do Now
Do not execute the file on production systems. If the binary is required, run it only in an isolated virtual machine and monitor for unexpected outbound connections or process manipulation. Keep endpoint protection enabled.
Where this verdict could be wrong1 caveat
- similarHashes shows 4/5 prior imphash matches with safe or suspicious verdicts; imphash collisions common across installer frameworks.
These are the assessment's weak points. If you believe one applies to your file, report the verdict and we'll re-review it.
- 71 of 76 engines returned clean
- No tier-1 detections
- No external-intel hits
- Unsigned executable
- Sandbox observed process injection (T1055)
- Direct-IP network traffic without domains
- One low-trust malicious detection
Treat the file as untrusted; run only in a controlled environment and monitor network activity until further reputation data becomes available.
Coverage & freshness
Complete means the check returned a usable result. It does not mean the file is safe.
Antivirus
Complete1 of 76 engines flagged the file.
Sandbox
Complete1 isolated runtime environment contributed observations.
Network
Partial6 runtime contacts were 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
- 8MITRE ATT&CK techniques
- 6spawned processes
- 6network contacts
- 1filesystem & 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: 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.
Moderate concern: Checked the environment for virtualisation or analysis tools.
Note: Collects details about your system.
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.
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
E220 V1.2.exe
61939bdd63d4613c28a5650945474108dba7381b9e1eac7ac289102ad0598ae8
01Uploaded file
Processes
Runtime execution
- ProcessObserved
Observed process
"C:\Users\<USER>\Desktop\program.exe"
02Isolated runtime analysis - ProcessObserved
Observed process
%SAMPLEPATH%\DSD TECH Lora.exe
03Isolated runtime analysis - +1 more recorded observation in Analyst mode
Files
Created or changed
- Written fileObserved
Roaming
C:\Users\user\AppData\Roaming
04Isolated runtime analysis
Network
Hosts contacted
- Contacted hostObserved
20.99.185.48
Contact observed during runtime.
05Isolated runtime analysis - Contacted hostObserved
192.229.211.108
Contact observed during runtime.
06Isolated runtime analysis - +1 more recorded observation in Analyst mode
6 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.
- 20.99.185.48
- 192.229.211.108
- 23.216.147.64
- 20.99.186.246
- 192.168.0.38
- 184.27.218.92
- C:\Users\user\AppData\Roaming
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
- 1 / 76engines flagged
- 5sources 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
1 of 76 antivirus engines flagged the file, including MaxSecure.
Verdict inputView chapterProvenanceObservedSourceAntivirus analysisObserved at - 03
The hash has been submitted 5 times from 5 sources.
ProvenanceDerivedSourceSaved report factsObserved at - 04
Scanned file: E220 V1.2.exe — 61939bdd63d4613c28a5650945474108dba7381b9e1eac7ac289102ad0598ae8
ProvenanceObservedSourceUploaded fileObserved at - 05
Observed process — "C:\Users\<USER>\Desktop\program.exe"
ProvenanceObservedSourceIsolated runtime analysisObserved at - 06
Observed process — %SAMPLEPATH%\DSD TECH Lora.exe
ProvenanceObservedSourceIsolated runtime analysisObserved at - 07
File written: Roaming — C:\Users\user\AppData\Roaming
ProvenanceObservedSourceIsolated runtime analysisObserved at - 08
Contacted host: 20.99.185.48 — Contact observed during runtime.
ProvenanceObservedSourceIsolated runtime analysisObserved at - 09
Contacted host: 192.229.211.108 — Contact observed during runtime.
ProvenanceObservedSourceIsolated runtime analysisObserved at
Detection sources at a glance
The available sources did not agree on a named threat category.
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\program.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.
Evidence20.99.185.48 · 192.229.211.108 · 23.216.147.64
1 of 76 engines flagged this file
View all 76 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
- E220 V1.2.exe
- Format
- Win32 EXE
- Code signing
- No verified publisher
- Size
- 350.0 KB
- Last analyzed
- Aug 15, 2026, 12:17 PM UTC
61939bdd63d4613c28a5650945474108dba7381b9e1eac7ac289102ad0598ae8Safety & FAQ
Complete recovery guidance and answers for the next decision.
What to do now
We couldn't fully clear this file. Treat it with caution.
- Recovery step 01
Don't run it unless you're certain it came from a source you trust.
- Recovery step 02
Check where you got it — an unexpected attachment or a random download link is a red flag.
- Recovery step 03
If its origin cannot be confirmed, delete this file and use a fresh copy from a trusted source. Get a fresh copy from the developer's official site or an official app store.
- Recovery step 04
If you're still unsure, scan it again in a day or two — detections often catch up on newer files.
Safety FAQ
Direct answers grounded in the saved verdict and evidence in this report.
Is E220 V1.2.exe safe, or is it malware?
What is E220 V1.2.exe?
How many antivirus engines detected E220 V1.2.exe?
I already downloaded and ran E220 V1.2.exe — what should I do?
How do I remove E220 V1.2.exe?
What is the SHA-256 hash of E220 V1.2.exe?
How up to date is this analysis of E220 V1.2.exe?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.