File scan report
Verdict Safe
Is Shama-
None of the 64 antivirus engines that checked it flagged this JAR, and its completed sandbox run produced no malicious verdict despite several uncorroborated MITRE technique…
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 64 flagged
- Flagged 0
- No detection 64
- No result 11
- Code signing Not applicable
- Test run Completed
- First seen 29d 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
None of the 64 antivirus engines that checked it detected the file, including 17 major antivirus engines, and the completed sandbox run did not produce a malicious verdict. Three offensive MITRE mappings deserve caution, but no injected target, persistence indicator, malicious child, or researcher rule corroborates them.
The strongest evidence is the absence of detections across 75 engines, with all 17 reporting major antivirus engines silent. One completed sandbox run returned a clean result and did not identify malicious execution. Although the runtime report mapped process injection, service persistence, and security-control impairment techniques, it recorded no injected process target or persistence indicator. The only recorded IP contact was explicitly attributed to sandbox background activity, while a complete host-reputation cross-check was not available. No malware-specific researcher rules, known malware-feed match, or verdict-backed malicious child supplied independent corroboration.
What We Detected
None of the 64 antivirus engines that checked it flagged the JAR, including all 17 major antivirus engines that reported a result. No malware family was identified, and researcher intelligence produced no malware-specific rule match or known malware-feed hit.
Threat Behavior
One completed sandbox run produced no malicious verdict. It mapped T1055, T1543.002, and T1562.001, but did not record an injected target process, persistence indicator, or malicious child. The observed IP contact was identified as analysis-environment background traffic, and no complete host-reputation cross-check is available. Six dropped files have no saved verdict, so they remain unresolved rather than proven benign.
What To Do Now
Use the file only if it came from the expected add-on source and its hash matches the publisher's value. Keep security software enabled, and reconsider execution if the application unexpectedly requests elevated permissions or attempts to alter security settings.
Where this verdict could be wrong3 caveats
- The sandbox mapped T1055, T1543.002, and T1562.001, which can represent injection, service persistence, and security-control impairment; however, no target process, persistence indicator, or malicious sandbox verdict corroborated them.
- The file was first observed on Sep 26, 2026 and has only eight submissions, so its history remains limited.
- Six dropped files lack saved verdicts, leaving their nature unresolved rather than establishing that they are benign.
These are the assessment's weak points. If you believe one applies to your file, report the verdict and we'll re-review it.
- None of the 64 antivirus engines that checked it flagged the file.
- All 17 reporting major antivirus engines returned no detection.
- The completed sandbox run produced no malicious verdict.
- No injected target process or persistence indicator was recorded.
- No malware-specific researcher rule, known malware-feed match, or malicious child verdict was found.
- The runtime report mapped possible process injection, service persistence, and security-control impairment techniques.
- The file has a relatively short 13-day observation history with eight submissions.
- No complete reputation cross-check is available for sample-attributed hosts, although the only recorded IP was sandbox background traffic.
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- 16sandbox rule tags
- 3spawned processes
- 0network contacts
- 13filesystem & mutex artifacts
Includes the sandbox verdicts, 16 mapped techniques, every process, file, registry and network entry and 2 dropped files.
Show the technical evidenceChapter 04
Technical details
None of the 64 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
- Oct 9, 2026, 11:12 AM UTC
- SHA-256
ed64ac7c390aa013602ebdaaa7045064c01fdc32c7dec0f94b9db52ed6e1672d- SHA-1
76d5f2b56a505738544b6c783c89e2eed746d56c- MD5
5d28d149d02179ea9a659eeaf529fa69
About this file
Shama-addon-1.21.11.jar is a JAR file of 669.5 kB.
- Type and size
- JAR · 669.5 kB
- Signer
- Not applicable
- First seen
- Sep 26, 2026On VirusTotal.
- Submitted by
- 8 distinct sourcesRarely seen: few people have submitted this exact file.
First scanned
Includes every engine result (75), 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 Shama-addon-1.21.11.jar safe?
What is Shama-addon-1.21.11.jar?
How many antivirus engines detected Shama-addon-1.21.11.jar?
What is the SHA-256 hash of Shama-addon-1.21.11.jar?
Is it safe to open or run Shama-addon-1.21.11.jar?
How up to date is this analysis of Shama-addon-1.21.11.jar?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.