yes, that's what I've written before :) He just asked about jpeg files :)
Yes, it could. Just an old example of what happened in the past: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS04-028.mspx...
if it's just a normal jpg with appended a malicious executable yes, you have to have a malware already active on the system able to split the...
Well, the problem wouldn't reside on the txt file itself (or jpg, or every other file format). The problem would reside on the application which...
Indeed it's quite difficult to write an exploit that hit txt files. Parsing a txt file is more than trivial ;D
Ok, well, steganography is a bit more complex concept than simply "merging files together", but yes, in this case it gives the right idea :)...
as said before, or it's an executable file with wrong extension or it is a real gif image with embedded executable inside it. If it's just a gif...
Well, usually an executable is embedded inside a jpg file to evade some basic security filters. It's a common way used by malwares to download...
Well, that's because most likely this is not a jpeg, but an executable with wrong extension (jpg instead of exe) :)
Thank you for the notification, it should be now fixed :)
We have seen a number of executables embedded inside JPGs/DOCs/any other file format. Be careful: when you double click on a JPG or any other...
That's my fault. I apologize about it. I handled a number of reports present in our report e-mail account and I was sure I replied to yours too....
Symantec missed a couple of Virut samples, because of a minor adjustement to their detection routines. Even Kaspersky didn't detect some Virut...
Nice trick, I've to use it more often when I'll be older ;D
From the screenshot looks like he's using Returnil, which would explain the false positive
Re: Prevex not finding an active spambot Ok, perfect :)
Re: Prevex not finding an active spambot Hi, I've sent to you two e-mails today. Could you check if you have got them or if they have been...
;D ;D
Yes, it does
When I know I'm just the only one who use that PC :shifty: ;D
It is a false positive, tho the way it acts is really way suspicious ::)
We shortly added detection for it after your submission:...
Can you check again? They should be now fixed :) Thank you :)
Just a big misunderstanding. Probably it has been reported as Bagle by one company and everyone else started detecting it as Bagle :)
It is a false positive ;) It's AVZ driver. I've fixed it
Separate names with a comma.
