Is IMG-20260716-WA0000(1).jpg safe?
None of 75 antivirus engines flagged this small JPEG, and its format plus consistent image-file comparisons provide strong benign evidence.
None of 75 antivirus engines detected a threat, including all 17 reporting tier-1 engines. The sample is a small JPEG with no conflicting static intelligence, although its exact hash is newly observed and no runtime or complete host-reputation result is available.
cb94de702fd7f4d183…ce10eff8c2e94cRecommended next actions
Before viewing
View it only when its sender or download source is one you trust.
If you already viewed 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.
None of 75 antivirus engines detected a threat, including all 17 reporting tier-1 engines. The sample is a small JPEG with no conflicting static intelligence, although its exact hash is newly observed and no runtime or complete host-reputation result is available.
The strongest evidence is the complete absence of detections across 75 antivirus engines, with all 17 reporting tier-1 engines also silent. The file is identified as a 44,982-byte JPEG, so code signing is not relevant. Five earlier image-file comparisons also received benign assessments, although file-type-only similarity is weak supporting evidence rather than proof. No completed runtime observation exists, and no complete contacted-host reputation check is available. The exact hash is newly observed, but that limited prevalence does not outweigh the broad static scan agreement.
What We Detected
None of 75 antivirus engines flagged the 44,982-byte JPEG. All 17 reporting tier-1 engines, including BitDefender, ESET-NOD32, Kaspersky, Microsoft, and Avast, returned undetected results. MalwareBazaar and CIRCL had no matching record, while the YARAify request timed out.
Threat Behavior
No completed sandbox run is available, so runtime behavior was not observed. The contacted-host cross-check was also unavailable, meaning no complete network-reputation conclusion can be drawn. There are no malicious dropped-child findings in the supplied evidence.
What To Do Now
The evidence supports handling this as an ordinary image. If it arrived unexpectedly, keep endpoint protection enabled and open it only with an updated image viewer; rescan if the file changes or new detections appear.
Where this verdict could be wrong2 caveats
- prevalence.classification=rare_new with 1 submission means the exact hash is newly observed and has little reputation history.
- externalIntel.availability.yaraify=error, behaviour=null, and contactedHosts=null leave YARA, runtime, and host-reputation coverage incomplete.
These are the assessment's weak points. If you believe one applies to your file, report the verdict and we'll re-review it.
- 0/75 antivirus engines reported a malicious or suspicious result.
- All 17 reporting tier-1 engines returned undetected.
- The file is identified as a 44,982-byte image/jpeg.
- MalwareBazaar and CIRCL returned no matching threat record.
- Five prior JPEG file-type comparisons were assessed as safe.
- The exact SHA-256 was first observed today and has only one recorded submission.
- No completed sandbox observation is available.
- No complete contacted-host reputation result is available.
- YARAify coverage was unavailable because the request timed out.
Normal image handling is reasonable based on the available evidence. Keep endpoint protection enabled and rescan if the source is untrusted or the file content changes.
Coverage & freshness
Complete means the check returned a usable result. It does not mean the file is safe.
Antivirus
Complete0 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
PartialIndependent reference checks were attempted but are incomplete.
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
- 0 / 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
0 of 75 antivirus engines flagged the file.
Verdict inputView chapterProvenanceObservedSourceAntivirus analysisObserved at - 02
One or more independent reference checks were incomplete or unavailable.
ProvenanceDerivedSourceExternal-intelligence coverageObserved at - 03
No completed runtime observation is available for this file.
ProvenanceDerivedSourceRuntime coverageObserved at
Detection sources at a glance
The available sources did not agree on a named threat category.
Available reference checks returned no match, but at least one source was unavailable. This is not a clean result.
YARA rules
No matchesThe rule pass completed without a saved public match.
0 of 75 engines flagged this file
View all 75 engine results
PE structure
Not applicablePE structure analysis applies to Windows executable formats, not this file type.
How widely this file has been seen
Barely seen in the wild and first surfaced recently. That limits reputation evidence, but rarity alone is not proof of malware.
Fingerprint and provenance
- File name
- IMG-20260716-WA0000(1).jpg
- Format
- JPEG
- Code signing
- Not applicable to this file type
- Size
- 43.9 KB
- Last analyzed
- Sep 28, 2026, 3:16 PM UTC
cb94de702fd7f4d183caae7b110f777f605ac4f36f65f414e1ce10eff8c2e94cSafety & 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
View it only when its sender or download source is one you 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 IMG-20260716-WA0000(1).jpg safe?
What is IMG-20260716-WA0000(1).jpg?
How many antivirus engines detected IMG-20260716-WA0000(1).jpg?
What is the SHA-256 hash of IMG-20260716-WA0000(1).jpg?
Is it safe to view IMG-20260716-WA0000(1).jpg?
How up to date is this analysis of IMG-20260716-WA0000(1).jpg?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.