File scan report
Verdict Safe
Is swemcull-
No antivirus engine detected this JAR, and its concerning behavioral mappings lack sandbox, file it created, network, or external-intelligence corroboration.
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 65 flagged
- Flagged 0
- No detection 65
- No result 10
- Code signing Not applicable
- Test run Completed
- First seen 2mo 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
The file received no detections from 75 antivirus engines, including 16 major antivirus engines, and the completed sandbox did not issue a malware verdict. Three offensive-technique mappings warrant caution, but no malicious child or external-intelligence match corroborates them; the eight files it created remain unclassified.
One sandbox run mapped activity to T1055, T1543.002, and T1562.001, but it produced no malware verdict and observed no network contacts. None of eight inspected child hashes was identified as malicious, although every child remains unclassified rather than confirmed benign. Research intelligence returned no CIRCL, MalwareBazaar, or YARAify match. Because the host-reputation cross-check was not completed or saved, no complete network-reputation conclusion is available.
What We Detected
None of the 65 antivirus engines that checked it flagged the JAR. CIRCL, MalwareBazaar, and YARAify supplied no matching intelligence.
Threat Behavior
One completed sandbox run mapped activity to T1055, T1543.002, and T1562.001. These mappings can be associated with process injection, service modification, and security-control impairment, but the sandbox issued no malware verdict and recorded no contacted domains, IP addresses, or URLs. Eight child hashes were inspected without a malicious result, though all eight remain unclassified. A complete contacted-host reputation result is unavailable because that cross-check was not saved.
What To Do Now
Keep security software enabled and obtain the JAR from its official project or distribution channel. If its origin is uncertain, verify its hash or release signature against the publisher's release information before running it.
Where this verdict could be wrong3 caveats
- The runtime mapping includes T1055, T1543.002, and T1562.001, which can represent process injection, service modification, and impairment of defenses.
- All 8 files it created have unknown verdicts, so the absence of a known-malicious dropped file does not establish that those files are benign.
- The missing contacted-host reputation result means no saved host-reputation cross-check is available.
These are the assessment's weak points. If you believe one applies to your file, report the verdict and we'll re-review it.
- 0/65 antivirus engines reported a malicious or suspicious detection.
- 16 major antivirus engines reported it clean and no major antivirus engines flagged it.
- No sandbox returned a malicious verdict.
- No dropped file is known to be malicious.
- YARAify, MalwareBazaar, and CIRCL returned no hits.
- Evidence from the test run mapped activity to T1055, T1543.002, and T1562.001.
- The missing contacted-host reputation result leaves host-reputation coverage incomplete.
- The sample was first submitted on Aug 21, 2026.
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- 15sandbox rule tags
- 3spawned processes
- 0network contacts
- 15filesystem & mutex artifacts
Includes 15 mapped techniques, every process, file, registry and network entry and 3 dropped files.
Show the technical evidenceChapter 04
Technical details
None of the 65 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
- Sep 9, 2026, 4:41 PM UTC
- SHA-256
fb176adfd8e56b03078027591f1213bf4a2de97ab8f5fbba68a3e8fcd4e8ac9b- SHA-1
de475c662178fb64c156bec531f2a1375b556e73- MD5
19df6c30dece4b5f46ac43e12f3ab7e9
About this file
swemcull-1.20.1-1.0.4.jar is a JAR file of 281.7 kB.
- Type and size
- JAR · 281.7 kB
- Signer
- Not applicable
- First seen
- Aug 21, 2026On VirusTotal.
- Submitted by
- 10 distinct sources
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 swemcull-1.20.1-1.0.4.jar safe?
What is swemcull-1.20.1-1.0.4.jar?
How many antivirus engines detected swemcull-1.20.1-1.0.4.jar?
What is the SHA-256 hash of swemcull-1.20.1-1.0.4.jar?
Is it safe to open or run swemcull-1.20.1-1.0.4.jar?
How up to date is this analysis of swemcull-1.20.1-1.0.4.jar?
Community
Member reviews and reports for this exact file hash.