Exetools  

Go Back   Exetools > General > General Discussion

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-05-2013, 16:07
Notmex Notmex is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 27
Rept. Given: 16
Rept. Rcvd 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks Given: 4
Thanks Rcvd at 1 Time in 1 Post
Notmex Reputation: 0
Identifying licenses / users from packed executables

Does maybe someone know if it is possible for protector vendors (like vmprotect) to identify the user that protected an executable? by watermarks or license hints that are implemented in the protected application?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-05-2013, 18:19
evlncrn8 evlncrn8 is offline
VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 179
Rept. Given: 36
Rept. Rcvd 54 Times in 24 Posts
Thanks Given: 49
Thanks Rcvd at 117 Times in 69 Posts
evlncrn8 Reputation: 54
yes if they have designed such things in their products, its entirely possible
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-05-2013, 19:10
giv's Avatar
giv giv is offline
VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Romania
Posts: 1,657
Rept. Given: 801
Rept. Rcvd 1,283 Times in 561 Posts
Thanks Given: 226
Thanks Rcvd at 562 Times in 240 Posts
giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299
Yes.
A simple hash in the protected executable code could identify the user who own the legitimate product that protected the file.
Many vendors do that.
That is why some antivirus software alarm when a file is suposed to be protected with a legitimate protector.
The AV company have the watermarks for the real products and they don't recognise the cracked/patched etc. products.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-05-2013, 19:43
Notmex Notmex is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 27
Rept. Given: 16
Rept. Rcvd 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks Given: 4
Thanks Rcvd at 1 Time in 1 Post
Notmex Reputation: 0
Thats what I heard in the past.. Leaked versions get detected by AVs. So I guess they submitted a method to identify a packed/protected executable and even allow access to something like a hash or so to identify a leaked/cracked version to AV companies. So it wont be good to use a leggit purchased protector to protect something evil as it prolly can be tracked back and even released/leaked versions are more evil since the AVs are able to filter them out before execution.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-05-2013, 21:10
giv's Avatar
giv giv is offline
VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Romania
Posts: 1,657
Rept. Given: 801
Rept. Rcvd 1,283 Times in 561 Posts
Thanks Given: 226
Thanks Rcvd at 562 Times in 240 Posts
giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299 giv Reputation: 1100-1299
Is not good thing at all to do some evil stuff.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Gave Reputation+1 to giv For This Useful Post:
Notmex (12-06-2013)
  #6  
Old 12-06-2013, 16:45
Conquest Conquest is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: 0x484F4D45
Posts: 125
Rept. Given: 46
Rept. Rcvd 29 Times in 17 Posts
Thanks Given: 31
Thanks Rcvd at 60 Times in 29 Posts
Conquest Reputation: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notmex View Post
Thats what I heard in the past.. Leaked versions get detected by AVs. So I guess they submitted a method to identify a packed/protected executable and even allow access to something like a hash or so to identify a leaked/cracked version to AV companies. So it wont be good to use a leggit purchased protector to protect something evil as it prolly can be tracked back and even released/leaked versions are more evil since the AVs are able to filter them out before execution.
sometime AVs block virtualized protected apps just because they dont accompany a valid signature/certificate. but recently this trend has come to a stop . now a days most AVs just flag something illegal if they find out certain protector watermarks which are part of publicly compromised distributions. kaspersky and mcafee used to flag any vmp app which isnt digitally signed or has been tempered. I dont know if they still do so(i just comodo firewall nothing else since i am fed up with antiviruses triggering out now and then).
More or less if you are thinking about doing something malicious , dont rely on protectors . those days are gone.
rather learn something new by making ur own obfuscator.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-07-2013, 03:32
atomix atomix is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 50
Rept. Given: 2
Rept. Rcvd 3 Times in 3 Posts
Thanks Given: 0
Thanks Rcvd at 4 Times in 2 Posts
atomix Reputation: 3
Yes, it is possible to watermark an app or the result of using an app (packed exe, image file, audio/video) using a hash or a user-specific string. Watch out if you suspect something. I've seen this before, and fortunately I could compare my licensed copy with another one and found the culprit hash used.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Gave Reputation+1 to atomix For This Useful Post:
p4r4d0x (12-07-2013)
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Need help identifying modified blowfish algo dion General Discussion 4 10-10-2020 04:13
Identifying compiler version from .NET binary jonwil General Discussion 2 06-25-2020 03:15


All times are GMT +8. The time now is 02:41.


Always Your Best Friend: Aaron, JMI, ahmadmansoor, ZeNiX, chessgod101
( 1998 - 2024 )