File scan report
Verdict Safe
Is meteor-
One less reliable engine raised a generic alert, while broad prevalence, clean runtime findings, and silence from all major engines strongly indicate a false positive.
Read the whole reasonShow less
Strong evidence · Widely seen for a long time, and nothing harmful found.
Good practice2 tips
We found nothing harmful in this file.
Run it only if it came from the project's own website.
Keep your security software and system updates switched on.
No scanner can promise a file is 100% safe.
Antivirus results
1 of 66 flagged
- Flagged 1
- No detection 65
- No result 9
- Code signing Not applicable
- Test run Completed
- First seen 7mo ago
Chapter 02
Why we think so
2 points against it and 5 in its favour, checked against the scan evidence.
The reasoning behind this verdict
Only 1 of the 66 antivirus engines that checked it flagged this JAR, using a generic label, while all major engines remained silent. It has appeared across 1,914 sources, and the combined sandbox verdict was clean without corroborated high-risk behaviour or harmful network reputation.
The only antivirus alert comes from MaxSecure and uses a generic trojan label rather than identifying a real malware family. None of the major engines flagged the file, leaving that alert without independent support. The file has substantial established prevalence, with 2,533 submissions from 1,914 sources since it was first seen on Mar 26, 2026. The combined sandbox verdict was clean and recorded no corroborated high-risk techniques or named injection targets. All observed hosts were covered by the reputation check, with none identified as malicious or suspicious, and no malicious file it created or malware-specific external rule was found.
What We Detected
Only 1 of the 66 antivirus engines that checked it flagged this Java archive. MaxSecure supplied a generic trojan label, while major engines including Microsoft, Kaspersky, ESET, BitDefender, and Avast did not flag it. No specific malware family was identified.
Threat Behavior
The combined sandbox verdict was clean. The reputation check covered every observed host and found none classified as malicious or suspicious.
What To Do Now
The isolated detection is strongly consistent with a false positive, particularly given the file's 2,533 submissions from 1,914 sources. Obtain the JAR from the project's official release channel, verify its checksum when one is published, and keep security software enabled.
Where this verdict could be wrong2 caveats
- MaxSecure reports a generic trojan detection, although no second engine corroborates it.
- The sandbox mapped T1562.001, but it recorded no supporting artefact and no named injection target, so the mapping does not establish defence tampering.
These are the assessment's weak points. If you believe one applies to your file, report the verdict and we'll re-review it.
- All major antivirus engines remained silent; only one less reliable engine raised an alert.
- The file has 2,533 submissions from 1,914 distinct sources.
- The combined sandbox verdict was clean without corroborated high-risk behaviour.
- Every observed host was checked, and none was identified as malicious or suspicious.
- No malicious dropped file, malware-specific community rule, or public malware-database listing was found.
- MaxSecure labels the file with a generic trojan detection.
- A sandbox technique mapping suggested possible defence-related activity, but no supporting artefact was recorded.
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
- 10sandbox rule tags
- 4spawned processes
- 1network contact
- 13filesystem & mutex artifacts
Includes the sandbox verdicts, 10 mapped techniques, every process, file, registry and network entry and 2 dropped files.
Show the technical evidenceChapter 04
Technical details
1 of the 66 antivirus engines that checked it flags it.
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 1
The saved verdict treats these detections as likely false positives.
- MaxSecureTrojan.Malware.300983.susgen
File fingerprint
- Last analyzed
- Oct 24, 2026, 1:47 PM UTC
- SHA-256
7aa5e6c22664eeea6f2927727c82c67206c29495eebbb2e3c29e8c134278d94f- SHA-1
c7d34cebe255d86d95633d2d7bbe5c6afc8785fe- MD5
068690162dce9380c03eb67d38124a3f
About this file
meteor-rejects-addon-0.3.jar is a JAR file of 3.2 MB.
- Type and size
- JAR · 3.2 MB
- Signer
- Not applicable
- First seen
- Mar 26, 2026On VirusTotal.
- Submitted by
- 1,914 distinct sources
First scanned Updated
Includes every engine result (75) 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 meteor-rejects-addon-0.3.jar safe?
What is meteor-rejects-addon-0.3.jar?
How many antivirus engines detected meteor-rejects-addon-0.3.jar?
What is the SHA-256 hash of meteor-rejects-addon-0.3.jar?
Is it safe to open or run meteor-rejects-addon-0.3.jar?
How up to date is this analysis of meteor-rejects-addon-0.3.jar?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.