←back to thread

Cyber Scarecrow

(www.cyberscarecrow.com)
606 points toby_tw | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
mafriese ◴[] No.40715995[source]
I don't understand why the software is built how it's built. Why would you want to implement licensing in the future for a software product that only creates fake processes and registry keys from a list: https://pastebin.com/JVZy4U5i . The limitation to 3 processes and license dialog make me feel uncomfortable using the software. All the processes are 14.1MB in size (and basically the scarecrow_process.dll - https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/83ea1c039f031aa2b05a082c...). I just don't understand why you create such a complex piece of software if you can just use a Powershell script that does exactly the same using less resources. The science behind it only kinda makes sense. There is some malware that is using techniques to check if there are those processes are running but by no means is this a good way to keep you protected. Most common malware like credential stealers (redline, vidar, blahblah) don't care about that and they are by far the most common type of malware deployed. Even ransomware like Lockbit doesn't care, even if it's attached to a debugger. I think this mostly creates a false sense of security and if you plan to grow a business out of this, it would probably only take hours until there would be an open source option available. Don't get me wrong - I like the idea of creating new ways of defending malware, what I don't like is the way you try to "sell" it.
replies(4): >>40716046 #>>40716158 #>>40716939 #>>40722787 #
kazinator ◴[] No.40716046[source]
They know that if this idea catches on, a dozen completely free imitations will crop up, so ... the time to grab whatever cash can be squeezed out of this is now.
replies(1): >>40722239 #
1. GordonS ◴[] No.40722239[source]
If something like this catches on, attackers will simply start checking the digital signature of the processes, to ensure they are genuine.
replies(1): >>40722413 #
2. umvi ◴[] No.40722413[source]
McAfee/Norton/etc. could license signed "scarecrow" versions of their products for use with something like this so that it's impossible for the malware to distinguish a scarecrow version of MacAfee from the real thing (and they would get a cut/kickback).

I would pay a small amount for a scarecrow version of AV software if a) it had zero footprint on my system resources, and b) it really did scare away malware that checks for such things.

Either way, though, it makes malware more onerous to develop since it has to bundle in public keys in order to verify running processes are correctly signed.