File scan report
Verdict Safe
Is armorstudio-
No engine detected this JAR, and its completed sandbox run produced no malicious verdict, though one service-related technique and limited prevalence merit caution.
Read the whole reasonShow less
Moderate evidence · No engine flags it, but no publisher signature confirms who made it.
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.
Reads the latest antivirus results for this file's hash. Nothing is uploaded.
Antivirus results
0 of 40 flagged
- Flagged 0
- No detection 40
- No result 34
- Code signing Not applicable
- Test run Completed
- First seen 3mo ago
Chapter 02
Why we think so
5 points against it and 5 in its favour, checked against the scan evidence.
The reasoning behind this verdict
None of the 40 antivirus engines that checked it detected the JAR, including eight major antivirus engines that completed analysis without a detection. One sandbox run produced no malicious verdict or network contacts, although it recorded and an inspected child whose final classification remains unresolved.
The strongest evidence is the complete absence of detections across 74 engines, with eight major antivirus engines explicitly reporting no detection. A completed sandbox run did not produce a malicious verdict and observed no contacted domains, IPs, or URLs. Researcher-curated intelligence sources also supplied no matching malware indicators, and the inspected child was not identified as malicious. T1543.002, debugger and CPU checks, and the unresolved child are legitimate caution points, but they lack corroboration from engines, sandbox verdicts, or external intelligence. The file has limited submission history, so confidence is strong rather than absolute.
What We Detected
None of the 40 antivirus engines that checked it flagged the JAR. Eight major antivirus engines completed analysis without a detection, including Microsoft, Avira, ESET-NOD32, Emsisoft, F-Secure, and GData. CIRCL, MalwareBazaar, and YARAify provided no matching malicious intelligence.
Threat Behavior
One sandbox run launched the sample through Java and did not issue a malicious sandbox verdict. It observed no contacted domains, IP addresses, or URLs. The run did record T1543.002 and environment-checking traits, while the single inspected child remained unresolved rather than affirmatively benign; no complete contacted-host reputation result was available.
What To Do Now
Use the JAR only if it came from the expected project or developer, and keep security software enabled. If its origin is uncertain, compare the SHA-256 hash with the publisher's official release before launching it.
Where this verdict could be wrong4 caveats
- The sandbox's offensive-technique list includes T1543.002, while the file's tag list includes detect-debug-environment and checks-cpu-name; these capabilities can be abused even though the sandbox issued no malicious verdict.
- droppedChildren.rollup records the single inspected child as unknown, so its nature was not affirmatively established.
- The missing contacted-host reputation result means no saved host-reputation cross-check is available, although the sandbox observed no network contacts.
- The file has only 1 submission from 1 source, limiting reputation-based assurance.
These are the assessment's weak points. If you believe one applies to your file, report the verdict and we'll re-review it.
- 0/40 antivirus engines detected the file.
- 8 major antivirus engines reported it clean and no major antivirus engines flagged it.
- No sandbox returned a malicious verdict.
- No network contacts were observed during the completed sandbox run.
- No CIRCL, MalwareBazaar, or YARAify hit was found.
- Sandbox evidence includes offensive technique T1543.002.
- Tags indicate debugger-environment and CPU-name checks.
- The single inspected child has an unresolved classification.
- Only one source has submitted this sample.
- No saved contacted-host reputation cross-check is available.
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 our isolated test environment; no test environment rated what it did as risky.
Test run summary
Capture complete- 4sandbox rule tags
- 1spawned processes
- 0network contacts
- 3filesystem & mutex artifacts
Includes 4 mapped techniques and every process, file, registry and network entry.
Show the technical evidenceChapter 04
Technical details
None of the 40 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
- Sep 8, 2026, 6:44 PM UTC
- SHA-256
8c6fc73680e971140340489dacc46c01af71efa912d6f98bc811e0655a1d4242- SHA-1
f446dfe5dfaf4778f0c8d989e630c3c2bb9ea160- MD5
d3b5727959dd8bc7b11d15569231e261
About this file
armorstudio-1.0.0.jar is a JAR file of 45.6 kB.
- Type and size
- JAR · 45.6 kB
- Signer
- Not applicable
- First seen
- Jul 13, 2026On VirusTotal.
- Submitted by
- 1 sourceRarely seen: few people have submitted this exact file.
First scanned Updated
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 armorstudio-1.0.0.jar safe?
What is armorstudio-1.0.0.jar?
How many antivirus engines detected armorstudio-1.0.0.jar?
What is the SHA-256 hash of armorstudio-1.0.0.jar?
Is it safe to open or run armorstudio-1.0.0.jar?
How up to date is this analysis of armorstudio-1.0.0.jar?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.