-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Consideration of packer identification tools #1
Comments
We evaluated the following packer detection tools to improve the detection coverage of FFRI Dataset scripts. As the evaluation, we use binaries of RCE_Lab UNPACME challenge. Evaluation resultYou can find the detailed analysis result at this repository. By combining two packer detection tools, we improve the detection coverage from 83% to 96%. |
The link to the RCE lab is broken. Is the correct link to https://github.com/apuromafo/RCE_Lab/tree/master/tuts4you ? It would be nice if you could add the results of experiments with other packers such as:
|
Thank you for your comment! (I also fix the broken link. Thank you again.) |
We have published the evaluation results of DIE. |
Thanks! |
FFRI Dataset provides the types of packers used in executables extracted by PEiD. However, some types of packers cannot be detected using this tool. A dataset user wants output results by other packer identification tools.
NOTE: This issue is originally pointed out by Mamoru Mimura at MWS Slack. Thank you.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: