File scan report
Verdict Suspicious
Is Trinity.
3 of the 65 antivirus engines that checked it flag this ZIP archive, but nothing confirms it is harmful.
Why Suspicious? 3 antivirus engines flag it; nothing else confirms it.
Limited evidence · One sign points to a problem; nothing else confirms it.
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 open or extract 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 opened or extracted 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
3 of 65 flagged
- Flagged 3
- No detection 62
- No result 9
- Code signing Not applicable
- Test run Completed
- First seen 4mo ago
Chapter 02
Why we think so
4 points against it and 4 in its favour, checked against the scan evidence.
The reasoning behind this verdict
This ZIP archive contains a Nuitka-compiled Python application flagged by one major antivirus engine (ESET) as a suspicious packed variant. However, only 1 of 17 major antivirus engines agreed, and the contacted IPs are consistent with legitimate certificate validation rather than malware a control server. No malicious files it created or external corroboration present.
The sample exhibits offensive MITRE techniques (process injection, system process modification) and contacted external IPs without domain resolution, which are typically malware indicators. However, the evidence is ambiguous: ESET's one flag from a major antivirus engine lacks consensus (16 other major antivirus engines clean), the contacted IPs are public infrastructure used for certificate validation, and the dropped DLLs are standard Python runtime libraries. The Nuitka compiler and obfuscation (AGen suffix) suggest intentional packing, but this is common in legitimate penetration-testing and system-administration tools. No malicious sandbox verdict, no external intel corroboration, and no confirmed malicious files it created weigh against a malicious verdict. The weak major consensus combined with ambiguous a control server indicators places this in suspicious territory rather than malicious.
What We Detected
A 44.7 MB ZIP archive named 'Trinity.zip' containing Nuitka-compiled Python binaries. One major antivirus engine (ESET-NOD32) flagged the sample as 'Python/Packed.Nuitka_AGen.MO suspicious application,' indicating obfuscated or packed Python code. Two additional engines (TrellixENS smaller, Webroot less reliable) reported generic malware signatures.
Threat Behavior
The sample contacted four external IP addresses (8.8.8.8, 104.18.38.233, 172.64.149.23, 162.159.36.2) without resolving any domains. These IPs belong to Google DNS and Cloudflare, and the contacted URLs are OCSP certificate-validation devices, suggesting legitimate infrastructure use rather than malware remote control. Ten files for files it created were observed; all remain unanalyzed in our system, and none have been confirmed malicious.
Risk Assessment
However, Nuitka-compiled Python applications commonly use rundll32 to load cryptographic libraries, and direct contact to public DNS and CDN infrastructure is consistent with certificate pinning or OCSP validation. The one detection from a major antivirus engine, absence of malicious sandbox verdict, lack of external corroboration (no YARAify rules, CIRCL hits, or MalwareBazaar entries), and medium prevalence (6 submitters) suggest this may be a legitimate but suspicious packed tool, such as a penetration-testing framework or system-administration utility.
What To Do Now
If you downloaded this file intentionally from a trusted source, verify its origin and purpose. If it arrived unexpectedly, do not execute it. Consider submitting the sample to your security team for manual analysis or sandboxing in an isolated environment.
Where this verdict could be wrong3 caveats
- No complete contacted-host reputation result was available. However, the obfuscation (AGen suffix) and lack of signer transparency argue against this.
- The direct-IP contact to Cloudflare and Google DNS could be legitimate certificate pinning or OCSP validation rather than a control server. The absence of named-domain contact is unusual for malware but not disqualifying.
- The file was first seen on Jun 19, 2026 with medium prevalence (6 submitters). If this were active malware, we would expect higher submission volume or more recent activity.
These are the assessment's weak points. If you believe one applies to your file, report the verdict and we'll re-review it.
- Contacted IPs are public infrastructure (Google DNS, Cloudflare) — not typical malware a control server
- No malicious sandbox verdict recorded
- No external intel corroboration (YARAify, CIRCL, MalwareBazaar)
- No confirmed malicious files it created
- Direct-IP contact without domain resolution — bypasses reputation-based blocklists
- Nuitka obfuscation (AGen suffix) — intentional code packing
- Unsigned binary — no publisher verification
- Generic smaller and less reliable detections — may indicate rule-based false positives
6 sources checked · 5 complete · 1 partial. 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- 21sandbox rule tags
- 12spawned processes
- 4network contacts
- 40filesystem & 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: Downloaded a file during the test run.
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 creating a service; no new service was recorded.
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
Trinity.zip
c766dfdaa774a80a4bcdfddf679ec2a09d8b372fe03c7e5b13e165804e20696e
Uploaded file
- 2
Processes
What ran
- Evidence 2 of 7: ProcessSeen in the test run
AmcacheParser.exe
"C:\Users\<USER>\AppData\Local\Temp\AmcacheParser.exe"
Test run - Evidence 3 of 7: ProcessSeen in the test run
AppCompatCacheParser.exe
"C:\Users\<USER>\AppData\Local\Temp\AppCompatCacheParser.exe"
Test run - +1 more recorded observation
- 2
Files
Created or changed
- Evidence 4 of 7: Written fileSeen in the test run
AmcacheParser.exe.log
C:\Users\<USER>\AppData\Local\Microsoft\CLR_v4.0\UsageLogs\AmcacheParser.exe.log
Test run - Evidence 5 of 7: Written fileSeen in the test run
AppCompatCacheParser.exe.log
C:\Users\<USER>\AppData\Local\Microsoft\CLR_v4.0_32\UsageLogs\AppCompatCacheParser.exe.log
Test run - +1 more recorded observation
- 2
Network
Hosts contacted
- Evidence 6 of 7: Contacted hostSeen in the test run
104.18.38.233
Contacted during the test run.
Test run - Evidence 7 of 7: Contacted hostSeen in the test run
172.64.149.23
Contacted during the test run.
Test run - +1 more recorded observation
7 facts from the test run. See the full activity list.
Includes 21 mapped techniques, every process, file, registry and network entry and 6 dropped files.
Show the technical evidenceChapter 04
Technical details
3 of the 65 antivirus engines that checked it flag it.
Sources checked
Every check behind this verdict
6 sources checked · 5 complete · 1 partial. Complete means the check returned a usable result; it does not mean the file is safe.
Engines that flagged it 3
- ESET-NOD32 (major engine)Python/Packed.Nuitka_AGen.MO suspicious application
- TrellixENS (major engine)Artemis!F1FEF6A2DB89
- WebrootWin.Malware.Gen
File fingerprint
- Last analyzed
- Jul 11, 2026, 4:19 AM UTC
- SHA-256
c766dfdaa774a80a4bcdfddf679ec2a09d8b372fe03c7e5b13e165804e20696e- SHA-1
0b1708707fa04560e80e05920d318cd56062c5af- MD5
3f7734d235366be39fcdb2c575ba8962
About this file
Trinity.zip is a ZIP file of 44.7 MB.
- Type and size
- ZIP · 44.7 MB
- Signer
- Not applicable
- First seen
- Jun 19, 2026On VirusTotal.
- Submitted by
- 6 distinct sourcesRarely seen: few people have submitted this exact file.
First scanned
Includes every engine result (74), 1 matched signature rule 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 Trinity.zip safe, or is it malware?
What is Trinity.zip?
How many antivirus engines detected Trinity.zip?
I already downloaded and opened or extracted Trinity.zip — what should I do?
What is the SHA-256 hash of Trinity.zip?
How up to date is this analysis of Trinity.zip?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.