Disclaimer: This demonstration is for authorized defensive research, malware analysis, and blue team training only. The techniques shown reflect real-world attacker behavior; understanding them is essential to building effective detection logic. Unauthorized use of obfuscation tools to bypass security controls violates the CFAA, GDPR, and cybersecurity laws.

Modern threat actors use malware obfuscation—often mislabeled as “crypters”—to evade both static (Scantime) and behavioral (Runtime) detection. This video demonstrates how such techniques operate in a controlled lab environment, not to enable evasion, but to expose detection gaps for defensive improvement.

Scantime: File scanned on disk → 0/70 detections on VirusTotal

Runtime: Payload executed in memory → no alerts from Windows Defender EDR, AMSI, or ETW

The test was conducted on a fully patched Windows 11 system with no exclusions, simulating real-world conditions.

Why This Matters for Blue Teams:

Scantime evasion exploits signature and heuristic gaps

Runtime evasion leverages process hollowing, unhooked RunPE, and AMSI bypass

Effective detection requires memory forensics, behavioral analytics, and YARA rules targeting STUB artifacts

This analysis aligns with MITRE ATT&CK:

T1027.002: Software Packing

T1055: Process Injection

T1562.001: Disable Windows Defender

Defensive Recommendations:

  1. Monitor for unusual child processes (e.g., rundll32.exe from temp folders)
  2. Deploy AMSI-aware EDR with script scanning
  3. Use sandbox detonation for unknown binaries
  4. Create detection rules for high entropy, API unhooking, and reflective loading

🔍 Note: The payload used is a benign proof-of-concept (e.g., MessageBox shellcode), not real malware.