File scan report
Verdict Suspicious
Is Installer.
Four of the 71 antivirus engines that checked it raised generic alerts, but long-term prevalence and contradictory sandbox results leave the file’s actual intent unresolved.
Read the whole reasonShow less
Why Suspicious? 4 antivirus engines flag it, but no major engine agrees and one sandbox test run rated it malicious while another found nothing.
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 install 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 installed 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
4 of 71 flagged
- Flagged 4
- No detection 67
- No result 4
- Code signing Unsigned
- Test run Completed
- First seen 10y ago
Chapter 02
Why we think so
3 points against it and 5 in its favour, checked against the scan evidence.
The reasoning behind this verdict
Four of the 71 antivirus engines that checked it flagged this unsigned installer, but no leading engine identified malware and the labels do not establish a real family. One sandbox run reported malicious activity while another reported clean, and no concrete high-risk action or hostile contacted host corroborated the adverse result.
The antivirus evidence is weak but not empty: 4 of the 71 antivirus engines that checked it flagged the executable, including one mid-tier detector, while all 18 reporting leading engines returned no detection. The sample has circulated broadly since 2015, with 3,646 distinct submitters and more than 13,000 submissions, which makes an undiscovered conventional trojan less likely. Runtime results conflict because one sandbox run returned malicious and another clean. The mapped process-injection, encryption, and security-tampering techniques lacked the artefacts needed to show those actions actually occurred, and no injected process was recorded. All observed hosts were covered by the reputation check without a hostile match, and neither malware-specific community rules nor public sample-database records corroborated the alerts. Because the file is unsigned and the split sandbox result prevents a benign conclusion, stronger provenance or reproducible evidence from the test run is needed.
What We Detected
Four of the 71 antivirus engines that checked it flagged the executable. SentinelOne produced a generic static alert, while Jiangmin, Trapmine, and VBA32 supplied lower-confidence generic labels; none establishes a consistent malware family. All 18 reporting leading engines returned no detection.
Threat Behavior
The sandbox results conflict: one run returned malicious and another returned clean. The observed activity mainly resembles installer operations, including registering legacy OCX components. Reputation checks covered all observed hosts and found no hostile matches.
What To Do Now
Do not run the file unless its origin and expected hash can be verified. If it came from an unofficial mirror, unsolicited download, or unexpected attachment, discard it and obtain a fresh installer from the software publisher’s official release channel while keeping security software enabled.
Where this verdict could be wrong3 caveats
- Four engines raised alerts, including SentinelOne at smaller, so the detections cannot be dismissed as exclusively less reliable noise.
- One sandbox run returned a malicious result, although another run returned clean and no concrete high-risk artefact corroborated the malicious result.
- The executable is unsigned, so there is no verified publisher identity to support its apparent installer role.
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 18 reporting leading antivirus engines returned no detection.
- The sample has been submitted by 3,646 sources more than 13,000 times since 2015.
- No concrete injection target or other high-risk runtime artefact was recorded.
- Reputation checks covered every observed host and found no hostile matches.
- No malware-specific community rule or public sample-database match was found.
- The executable has no verified publisher signature.
- Four antivirus engines raised generic or machine-learning alerts.
- One sandbox run returned a malicious result, although another returned clean.
6 sources checked · all complete. See every source
Chapter 03
What it did in our test
It ran in 9 isolated tests; 1 test environment rated what it did as risky.
Test run summary
Capture complete- 9isolated sandbox runs
- 22sandbox rule tags
- 15spawned processes
- 23network contacts
- 40filesystem & mutex artifacts
What the test run showed
What the file did on a test computer
Confirmed in the test run
High concern: Encrypted files on the test computer, as ransomware does.
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 network settings of 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 weakening security settings; no setting change was recorded.
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
Installer.exe
a453b3ea8d8133531fad26b18701c694c324cc201e3069d07e99f0e100908c1a
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
regsvr32
regsvr32 /s "C:\Windows\system32\COMDLG32.OCX"
Test run - +1 more recorded observation
- 2
Files
Created or changed
- Evidence 4 of 7: Written fileSeen in the test run
~DF96C9AFD8CF1E6554.TMP
C:\Users\<USER>\AppData\Local\Temp\~DF96C9AFD8CF1E6554.TMP
Test run - Evidence 5 of 7: Written fileSeen in the test run
Installer.exe
C:\Program Files (x86)\Technitium\TMACv6.0\Installer.exe
Test run - +1 more recorded observation
- 2
Network
Hosts contacted
- Evidence 6 of 7: Contacted hostSeen in the test run
c-0001.c-msedge.net
Contacted during the test run.
Test run - Evidence 7 of 7: Contacted hostSeen in the test run
au.c-0001.c-msedge.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, 22 mapped techniques, every process, file, registry and network entry and 10 dropped files.
Show the technical evidenceChapter 04
Technical details
4 of the 71 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 4
- JiangminTrojan.Generic.haljt
- SentinelOneStatic AI - Suspicious PE
- Trapminesuspicious.low.ml.score
- VBA32Trojan.Win32.Phishing
File fingerprint
- Last analyzed
- Oct 18, 2026, 4:58 PM UTC
- SHA-256
a453b3ea8d8133531fad26b18701c694c324cc201e3069d07e99f0e100908c1a- SHA-1
3229e8080975f4f5512d2382552f68c0389acff5- MD5
a7c8cf1d50ebe630a7d0c47686a0abbf
About this file
Installer.exe says it is Technitium Installer v4.4, 5.3 MB.
- Claims to be
- Technitium Installer v4.4From the file's own version information, written by whoever built it.
- Original name
- Installer.exeMatches the shared file name.
- Type and size
- Win32 EXE · 5.3 MB
- Signer
- UnsignedNo code signature.
- First seen
- Nov 19, 2015On VirusTotal.
- Submitted by
- 3,646 distinct sources
- Packer
- None detected
- Entropy
- 5.51 of 8
First scanned Updated
Verdict history
- Malicious
- Suspiciousafter a new scan
Ratings change when antivirus engines, our checks or MalwareTips staff learn more about a file.
Includes every engine result (75), 1 matched signature rule, 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 Installer.exe safe, or is it malware?
What is Installer.exe?
How many antivirus engines detected Installer.exe?
What should I do if I already installed Installer.exe?
What is the SHA-256 hash of Installer.exe?
How up to date is this analysis of Installer.exe?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.
