File scan report
Verdict Suspicious
Is Fate Injector. exe safe? Treat it as suspicious.
8 of the 70 antivirus engines that checked it flag this Windows program, but nothing confirms it is harmful.
Why Suspicious? 8 antivirus engines flag it and one of our detection rules matched it.
Moderate evidence · More than one sign points to a problem, but nothing confirms it is harmful.
If it came from a link, an attachment or a stranger, delete it.
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.
Reads the latest antivirus results for this file's hash. Nothing is uploaded.
Antivirus results
8 of 70 flagged
- Flagged 8
- No detection 62
- No result 5
- Code signing Unsigned
- Test run Completed
- First seen 5y ago
Chapter 02
Why we think so
4 points against it and 5 in its favour, checked against the scan evidence.
The reasoning behind this verdict
Although only 8 of the 70 antivirus engines that checked it flagged it, the two unwanted program detections from major antivirus engines, unsigned status, and injector behavior warrant avoiding execution outside an isolated research environment.
Eight of the 70 antivirus engines that checked it flagged the executable, including ESET-NOD32 and Sophos, although their major labels characterize it as unwanted program rather than agreeing on a malware family. Gridinsoft's Cobalt Strike label is concerning, but it is not corroborated enough to establish that family or a confirmed hacking tool finding. The completed sandbox verdict was clean, and the full reputation check covering all 25 observed hosts found no malicious or suspicious destinations. Its broad, long-term prevalence is additional counter-evidence, but the unsigned injector behavior leaves substantial unresolved risk.
What We Detected
Eight of the 70 antivirus engines that checked it flagged the file. ESET-NOD32 and Sophos supplied the two major detections, but both used potentially unwanted application labels; Gridinsoft alone named Cobalt Strike, while Malwarebytes identified an injector-type riskware application.
Threat Behavior
It also recorded startup-related activity under T1547.001 and reflective code loading under T1620. These capabilities can enable stealthy execution and persistence, although the sandbox's overall verdict was clean and the complete check of 25 contacted hosts found no malicious or suspicious destinations.
What To Do Now
Do not run this unsigned executable on a normal workstation. If examination is necessary, use a disposable, isolated virtual machine with security software enabled, and verify the hash and download source against an authoritative release channel before proceeding.
Where this verdict could be wrong3 caveats
- The complete reputation check of 25 observed hosts found no malicious or suspicious destinations.
- Most engines did not flag the file, and the two major detections characterize it as potentially unwanted software rather than agreeing on a malware family.
- The file is old and widely submitted, which reduces the likelihood that it is a newly emerging threat.
These are the assessment's weak points. If you believe one applies to your file, report the verdict and we'll re-review it.
- The completed sandbox run returned a clean overall verdict.
- A complete reputation check of all 25 observed hosts found no malicious or suspicious destinations.
- The sample has been submitted by 3,723 sources across 18,287 submissions since 2021.
- No packing or high-entropy code was identified.
- No inspected file it created had a saved malicious verdict.
- The executable is unsigned and has no established publisher history.
- The test run recorded injection into WMIADAP.EXE and several updater processes.
- Eight antivirus engines raised detections, including two major antivirus engines.
- One engine associated the file with Cobalt Strike, although that family attribution lacks sufficient corroboration.
6 sources checked · all complete. See every source
Chapter 03
What it did in our test
It ran in our isolated test environment; no test environment rated what it did as risky.
Test run summary
Capture complete- 29sandbox rule tags
- 4spawned processes
- 3network contacts
- 26filesystem & 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: Ran commands or a script on the test computer.
Moderate concern: Used an unusual way to talk to a server.
Moderate concern: Checked whether it was running on a test computer.
Note: Read the user name of the test computer.
Note: Listed the programs running on the test computer.
Note: Talked to servers over the internet during the test run.
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 recording keystrokes; no keylogging was confirmed.
Not confirmed: A sandbox rule tagged this run as setting up auto-start; no auto-start entry was recorded.
Not confirmed: A sandbox rule tagged this run as changing how Windows loads code; 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
FateInjector.exe
77a84c4ed29551d8968a9bc5de796d6f8463fa54df8554b3cff91ca83d8ff70d
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
77a84c4ed29551d8968a9bc5de796d6f8463fa54df8554b3cff91ca83d8ff70d.exe
${SamplePath}\77a84c4ed29551d8968a9bc5de796d6f8463fa54df8554b3cff91ca83d8ff70d.exe
Test run - +1 more recorded observation
- 2
Files
Created or changed
- Evidence 4 of 7: Written fileSeen in the test run
config.txt
C:\Users\<USER>\Desktop\config.txt
Test run - Evidence 5 of 7: Written fileSeen in the test run
config.txt
${SamplePath}\config.txt
Test run - +1 more recorded observation
- 2
Network
Hosts contacted
- Evidence 6 of 7: Contacted hostSeen in the test run
adl.windows.com
Contacted during the test run.
Test run - Evidence 7 of 7: Contacted hostSeen in the test run
sfd-production.azurefd.net
Contacted during the test run.
Test run - +1 more recorded observation
7 facts from the test run. See the full activity list.
Includes the sandbox verdicts, 29 mapped techniques, every process, file, registry and network entry and 1 dropped file.
Show the technical evidenceChapter 04
Technical details
8 of the 70 antivirus engines that checked it flag it; no publisher signature.
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 8
- ESET-NOD32 (major engine)Generik.MSDGRRH potentially unwanted application
- Sophos (major engine)Generic Reputation PUA (PUA)
- GoogleDetected
- GridinsoftTrojan.Win64.CobaltStrike.tr
- MalwarebytesRiskWare.Injector
- RisingPUA.Undefined!8.132FE (CLOUD)
- VaristW64/ABApplication.FJGK-1140
- YandexTrojan.Igent.b63LeS.1
File fingerprint
- Last analyzed
- Oct 14, 2026, 12:25 AM UTC
- SHA-256
77a84c4ed29551d8968a9bc5de796d6f8463fa54df8554b3cff91ca83d8ff70d- SHA-1
65a9e65bf9b2b683ed93ac9848df8b5c9f3d4297- MD5
9e6de7c7ebd1a00c2f7ddec78ba9403a
About this file
FateInjector.exe is a Win32 EXE file of 3.9 MB.
- Type and size
- Win32 EXE · 3.9 MB
- Signer
- UnsignedNo code signature.
- First seen
- Jan 13, 2021On VirusTotal.
- Submitted by
- 3,723 distinct sources
- Packer
- None detected
- Entropy
- 6.12 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 6 questions people ask most about this file.
Is FateInjector.exe safe, or is it malware?
What is FateInjector.exe?
How many antivirus engines detected FateInjector.exe?
What should I do if I already ran FateInjector.exe?
What is the SHA-256 hash of FateInjector.exe?
How up to date is this analysis of FateInjector.exe?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.