Is HelloNeighborEnhanced.exe safe?
Only Jiangmin flagged this unsigned, newly observed executable as AmsiETWPatch; all tier-1 engines remained silent, and the hacktool label lacks confirmation.
The detection pattern strongly resembles a false positive: just 1 of 75 engines flagged the file, and that result came from a low-trust detector. However, the executable is unsigned, newly observed, and has no completed sandbox run, so it should still be obtained only from a trusted source.
c524e17bbb23905fa7…6bf3acecec8a9dRecommended next actions
Before running
Run it only when it came from the developer's official site or another source you independently trust.
If you already ran it
Keep normal device protection enabled and stop if the file behaves unexpectedly.
Intelligence
The saved assessment, checked against the scan evidence and recorded coverage.
The reasoning behind this verdict
This section explains the evidence supporting the verdict and keeps conflicting or missing signals visible.
The detection pattern strongly resembles a false positive: just 1 of 75 engines flagged the file, and that result came from a low-trust detector. However, the executable is unsigned, newly observed, and has no completed sandbox run, so it should still be obtained only from a trusted source.
Jiangmin is the only engine reporting AmsiETWPatch among 75 engines, while all 17 reporting tier-1 engines remained silent. The hacktool label is not confirmed by another engine or any tier-1 detector, so it does not meet the corroboration threshold for offensive tooling. No completed sandbox run is available, and the listed MITRE techniques are benign-common static indicators rather than observed offensive behavior. The executable is unsigned and has almost no prevalence history, which limits confidence in the otherwise false-positive-shaped result. External intelligence returned no corroborating rules or known-malware records, although absence of such hits cannot prove benignity.
What We Detected
Only 1 of 75 engines flagged the executable. Jiangmin, categorized as a low-trust detector here, labeled it AmsiETWPatch; all 17 reporting tier-1 engines remained silent, and engines.hacktoolConfirmed=false.
Threat Behavior
No completed sandbox run is available because behaviour.sandboxCount=0. The static analysis lists T1012, T1083, and T1129, but these are ambient techniques commonly seen in ordinary Windows software, while offensiveCount=0. The code section is not unusually entropic, no packer was identified, and no malicious child was reported. Host-reputation checking was not completed or saved, so no conclusion can be drawn about contacted-host reputation.
What To Do Now
Verify that the SHA-256 hash matches the developer's official release and obtain the file only from the original project or vendor channel. Keep endpoint protection enabled; if the source cannot be verified, avoid running the executable until a completed sandbox analysis or stronger publisher history becomes available.
Where this verdict could be wrong4 caveats
- Jiangmin labels the sample 'HackTool.AmsiETWPatch.cn', but no second engine or tier-1 engine corroborates that hacktool identification.
- The file is unsigned and has only 1 submission from 1 source, leaving little publisher or prevalence history to validate it.
- contactedHosts=null, so no complete contacted-host reputation result is available.
- similarHashes[0].verdict='safe' shares the imphash, but signerMatchesSubject=false means this could be a common build-framework collision rather than close lineage.
These are the assessment's weak points. If you believe one applies to your file, report the verdict and we'll re-review it.
- Only 1/75 engines detected the sample
- engines.tier1Malicious=0
- engines.hacktoolConfirmed=false
- peAnalysis.highEntropyCode=false and likelyPacked=false
- YARAify ruleCount=0 and CIRCL knownMalicious=null
- Unsigned Windows executable
- Newly observed with 1 submission from 1 source
- Jiangmin detection: HackTool.AmsiETWPatch.cn
- No completed sandbox execution
- No complete contacted-host reputation result
Use the file only if its SHA-256 can be verified against an official developer release. Keep security protection enabled and avoid execution when the source or expected hash cannot be confirmed.
Coverage & freshness
Complete means the check returned a usable result. It does not mean the file is safe.
Antivirus
Complete1 of 75 engines flagged the file.
Sandbox
PartialRuntime data is present, but no completed sandbox environment is recorded.
Network
Not runNo contacted-host reputation check is recorded.
No timestamp recordedYARA
CompleteRule evaluation completed with no recorded matches.
External intel
Complete3 of 3 independent reference sources completed.
Behavior
Plain-English impact first, then the observed runtime evidence.
Runtime behavior was not available
The report does not treat a missing runtime observation as a clean result.
Detection & Forensics
Consensus, attribution, signatures, code structure, prevalence, and identity.
Evidence integrity
Chain of custody for the facts preserved in this report.
- 0rule hits recorded
- 1 / 75engines flagged
- 1sources in submission history
Why these facts are shown
Each statement identifies whether it was directly recorded or derived from saved scan facts.
- 01
No completed runtime observation is available for this file.
ProvenanceDerivedSourceRuntime coverageObserved at - 02
1 of 75 antivirus engines flagged the file, including Jiangmin.
Verdict inputView chapterProvenanceObservedSourceAntivirus analysisObserved at - 03
The hash has been submitted 1 time from 1 source.
ProvenanceDerivedSourceSaved report factsObserved at
Detection sources at a glance
The available sources did not agree on a named threat category.
MalwareBazaar, YARAify, and CIRCL hashlookup completed and returned no entries for this hash.
YARA rules
No matchesThe rule pass completed without a saved public match.
1 of 75 engines flagged this file
View all 75 engine results
Section entropy & packers
No high-entropy executable section or known packer signature was detected. Data and resource sections can still have high entropy without indicating packed code.
How widely this file has been seen
Barely seen in the wild and first surfaced recently. 1 antivirus detection make that low prevalence materially relevant, but rarity alone is not proof of malware.
Fingerprint and provenance
- File name
- HelloNeighborEnhanced.exe
- Format
- Win32 EXE
- Code signing
- No verified publisher
- Size
- 150.5 KB
- Last analyzed
- Oct 3, 2026, 6:32 AM UTC
c524e17bbb23905fa716c5e9ea5761e1184c98780fc1fcac2e6bf3acecec8a9dSafety & FAQ
Complete recovery guidance and answers for the next decision.
What to do now
This file appears low risk based on the evidence available now.
- Recovery step 01
Run it only when it came from the developer's official site or another source you independently trust.
- Recovery step 02
A clean result reduces known risk, but it cannot guarantee that every new or targeted threat has been detected.
- Recovery step 03
Keep your antivirus and Windows updates switched on so you stay protected.
Safety FAQ
Direct answers grounded in the saved verdict and evidence in this report.
Is HelloNeighborEnhanced.exe safe?
What is HelloNeighborEnhanced.exe?
How many antivirus engines detected HelloNeighborEnhanced.exe?
What is the SHA-256 hash of HelloNeighborEnhanced.exe?
Is it safe to run HelloNeighborEnhanced.exe?
How up to date is this analysis of HelloNeighborEnhanced.exe?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.