mailing list archives
Re: Multiple AV Vendors ignoring tar.gz archives
From: Paul Laudanski <zx () castlecops com>
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 14:22:58 -0500 (EST)
Thanks for replying back so quickly with further details. I tested a
standard .tar.bz2 file and found that nod32lms didn't report on diving
into it. I'll try to make time later to test it with a .tar.bz2 file
which contains Eicar. However, I've also included NOD32 support in this
But this is just one company, you do have a point.
On Sat, 5 Feb 2005, Barrie Dempster wrote:
I didn't configure the AV's I didn't fancy installing all of them and
thought virus total would give a good indication. It appears from the
virustotal results and from http://www.nod32.com/products/nt.htm that
nod32 will scan and detect tar.gz's but not bz2's. This is the most
common result and could be argued to be valid by the vendors.
However you can open tar.bz2's on windows so it's still a valid
infection vector, although probably not all that useful for viruses. I
don't believe many users will go googling for the tools needed.
Nonetheless at least a few of the vendors think it's necessary to go
beyond the common zip and rar.
Paul Laudanski - Computer Cops, LLC.
CastleCops(SM) - http://castlecops.com
http://cuddlesnkisses.com | http://justalittlepoke.com | http://zhen-xjell.com
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.