File scan report
Verdict Suspicious
Is WPFApp. exe safe? Treat it as suspicious.
This signed .NET program is labelled a software bundler or potentially unwanted program by several engines, including BitDefender and Malwarebytes, and it contacts…
Read the whole reasonShow less
Why Suspicious? 12 antivirus engines flag it; nothing else confirms it.
Limited evidence · One sign points to a problem; nothing else confirms it.
Avoid running this program unless you trust its source and want what it bundles; if it appeared unexpectedly, uninstall it and run a full scan with your security software enabled.
What to do now4 steps
Some signs point to a problem, but nothing confirms it is harmful. Treat it with caution.
What to do
Don't run it unless you're sure where it came from.
Check where you got it: an unexpected attachment, a link someone sent you or a re-upload is a red flag.
If you can't confirm where it came from, delete it. If you need the program, download it again from the publisher's own website.
If you already ran it
Stop using it, run a full scan with your antivirus and watch for unexpected behavior or security alerts.
Not sure what to do?
Ask the MalwareTips community before you run it. If you already ran it, follow the cleanup guide.
- Ask for free help on the MalwareTips forumWindows malware removal help, answered by volunteers. (opens malwaretips.com in a new tab)
- Remove malware from WindowsStep-by-step cleanup with free tools. (opens malwaretips.com in a new tab)
Paste this report's link in your topic so helpers can see what was found.
Antivirus results
12 of 69 flagged
- Flagged 12
- No detection 57
- No result 6
- Code signing OSAds LTD
- Test run Completed
- First seen 10mo ago
Chapter 02
Why we think so
4 points against it and 4 in its favour, checked against the scan evidence.
The reasoning behind this verdict
12 of the 69 antivirus engines that checked it flag this file, mostly as a bundler or potentially unwanted program (BitDefender's engine family and Malwarebytes), with Kaspersky adding a cloud reputation detection. It carries a valid signature from OSAds LTD, a publisher we hold no history for. The sandbox runs showed no high-risk techniques, but the program sent data to two outside web APIs.
Two major antivirus engines flag the file: BitDefender (shared by GData, Emsisoft, ALYac and others) as an application bundler, and Kaspersky with a generic cloud reputation verdict. Malwarebytes and Gridinsoft separately label it a potentially unwanted program, so the detections point to unwanted bundled or advertising software rather than a classic trojan. The signature from OSAds LTD is valid, but the publisher is not on our trusted list and we have no history for it. Sandbox runs recorded no injection targets, persistence or high-risk techniques, and the two contacted hosts are not in our malicious cache. The file was first seen on Dec 11, 2025 and is widely submitted, which fits commercial bundleware.
What We Detected
12 of the 69 antivirus engines that checked it flag this signed .NET executable. Most labels describe a software bundler or potentially unwanted program: BitDefender's engine family reports Application.Bundler.Conivus, Malwarebytes reports PUP.Optional.MediaArena, and Gridinsoft reports a similar unwanted-program label. Kaspersky adds a generic cloud reputation detection. The file is signed by OSAds LTD with a valid signature, but this publisher has no history with us.
Threat Behavior
Across four sandbox runs no high-risk techniques, process injection targets or persistence were recorded. The program contacted two outside web APIs that look like messaging and reporting devices, and it launched under several generic process names. Neither contacted host is in our malicious cache. This profile fits bundleware or adware-style software rather than a data-stealing trojan.
What To Do Now
If you did not knowingly install this program, remove it and check your installed programs and browser settings for anything it may have added. Keep your security software enabled and run a full scan.
Where this verdict could be wrong2 caveats
- The file has a valid signature and has been seen by 276 different submitters since Dec 11, 2025, which fits a widely distributed commercial bundler rather than a targeted trojan.
- No high-risk runtime techniques, injection targets or persistence were recorded across the sandbox runs, and none of the contacted hosts are in our malicious cache.
These are the assessment's weak points. If you believe one applies to your file, report the verdict and we'll re-review it.
- Valid code signature
- Widely submitted by 276 different sources since Dec 11, 2025
- No high-risk techniques, injection targets or persistence observed in four sandbox runs
- Contacted hosts are not in our malicious cache
- Several engines, including BitDefender and Malwarebytes, label it a bundler or potentially unwanted program
- Kaspersky flags it with a cloud reputation detection
- Signed by a publisher with no history and not on our trusted list
- Sends data to two outside web APIs during execution
6 sources checked · all complete. 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
- 14sandbox rule tags
- 4spawned processes
- 4network contacts
- 16filesystem & mutex artifacts
What the test run showed
What the file did on a test computer
Confirmed in the test run
Moderate concern: Contains packed or scrambled code that is harder to inspect (common in installers too).
Moderate concern: Unpacked hidden content while it ran.
Moderate concern: Checked whether it was running on a test computer.
Note: Deleted files or logs during the test run (installers often clean up after themselves).
Note: Talked to servers over the internet during the test run.
Note: Read basic details of the test computer, such as its Windows version.
Sandbox labels we could not confirm (common in safe files too)
Not confirmed: A sandbox rule tagged this run as code injection, but no injected program was recorded.
Not confirmed: A sandbox rule tagged this run as weakening security settings; no setting change was recorded.
Not confirmed: A sandbox rule tagged this run as loading code in memory; nothing confirms it.
This file was run on a test computer (a sandbox), not on yours. Labels we could not confirm are listed so you can see them, but they are not treated as evidence against the file.
Recorded behavior
What happened in the test
Grouped by step. The order is not a timeline.
- 1
Input file
The submitted object
- Evidence 1 of 7: FileSeen in the test run
WPFApp.exe
6753a63c6ae3b9b045304a464d08617c09af390772c0fbd12579967d48106e14
Uploaded file
- 2
Processes
What ran
- Evidence 2 of 7: ProcessSeen in the test run
file.exe
"C:\Users\<USER>\Desktop\file.exe"
Test run - Evidence 3 of 7: ProcessSeen in the test run
PDFStunner.exe
"C:\Users\user\Desktop\PDFStunner.exe"
Test run - +1 more recorded observation
- 2
Files
Created or changed
- Evidence 4 of 7: Written fileSeen in the test run
Download-1.tmp
C:\Windows\ServiceProfiles\LocalService\AppData\Local\FontCache\Fonts\Download-1.tmp
Test run - Evidence 5 of 7: Written fileSeen in the test run
System.Collections.Immutable, Version=9.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a
C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\NetFramework\BreadcrumbStore\System.Collections.Immutable, Version=9.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a
Test run - +1 more recorded observation
- 2
Network
Hosts contacted
- Evidence 6 of 7: Contacted hostSeen in the test run
api.konfigot.com
Contacted during the test run.
Test run - Evidence 7 of 7: Contacted hostSeen in the test run
getinf.marvalsearch.com
Contacted during the test run.
Test run - +1 more recorded observation
7 facts from the test run. See the full activity list.
Includes 14 mapped techniques and every process, file, registry and network entry.
Show the technical evidenceChapter 04
Technical details
12 of the 69 antivirus engines that checked it flag it; signed by OSAds LTD.
Sources checked
Every check behind this verdict
6 sources checked · all complete. Complete means the check returned a usable result; it does not mean the file is safe.
Engines that flagged it 12
- BitDefender (major engine)Application.Bundler.Conivus.24
- Emsisoft (major engine)Application.Bundler.Conivus.24 (B)
- GData (major engine)Application.Bundler.Conivus.24
- Kaspersky (major engine)UDS:DangerousObject.Multi.Generic
- ALYacApplication.Bundler.Conivus.24
- ArcabitApplication.Bundler.Conivus.24
- DeepInstinctMALICIOUS
- GridinsoftPUP.Win32.MediaArena.cl
File fingerprint
- Last analyzed
- Oct 26, 2026, 1:24 AM UTC
- SHA-256
6753a63c6ae3b9b045304a464d08617c09af390772c0fbd12579967d48106e14- SHA-1
5e870b9e11d2883f7e48629678e1f0d561a0c820- MD5
4f3acfa48186363f91ec1c516bae4d2d
About this file
WPFApp.exe is a Win32 EXE file of 7.9 MB.
- Claims to be
- WPFAppFrom the file's own version information, written by whoever built it.
- Original name
- WPFApp.exeMatches the shared file name.
- Type and size
- Win32 EXE · 7.9 MB
- Signer
- OSAds LTDValid code signature.
- First seen
- Dec 11, 2025On VirusTotal.
- Submitted by
- 276 distinct sources
- Packer
- None detected
- Entropy
- 8.00 of 8
First scanned
Includes every engine result (75), 2 matched signature rules, PE section entropy and packers and how widely the file has been seen.
Show the technical evidenceChapter 05
Questions & answers
Short answers to the 7 questions people ask most about this file.
Is WPFApp.exe safe, or is it malware?
What is WPFApp.exe?
How many antivirus engines detected WPFApp.exe?
What should I do if I already ran WPFApp.exe?
Is WPFApp.exe digitally signed?
What is the SHA-256 hash of WPFApp.exe?
How up to date is this analysis of WPFApp.exe?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.