malware-analysis-tr_skill

This skill performs analyst-grade static analysis, TI triage, and behavioral reasoning on suspicious PE files to produce actionable malware reports.
  • Python

250

GitHub Stars

1

Bundled Files

2 months ago

Catalog Refreshed

4 months ago

First Indexed

Readme & install

Copy the install command, review bundled files from the catalogue, and read any extended description pulled from the listing source.

Installation

Preview and clipboard use veilstrat where the catalogue uses aiagentskills.

npx veilstrat add skill tsale/awesome-dfir-skills --skill malware-analysis-tr

  • SKILL.md9.9 KB

Overview

This skill automates a professional malware analysis workflow for PE executables and other suspicious files and produces analyst-grade threat reports with evidence-backed conclusions. It performs static inspection, threat intelligence triage, behavioral inference, packing and anti-analysis assessment, and produces prioritized recommendations. Reports emphasize confidence levels and actionable outcomes rather than raw data dumps.

How this skill works

On file upload the skill runs a series of static collectors to extract hashes, PE metadata, imports, strings, section entropy, and suspicious indicators. It cross-checks the sample against threat intelligence sources (VirusTotal, MalwareBazaar, ThreatFox, etc.), extracts IOCs, maps API patterns to likely behaviors, and assesses packing and anti-analysis artifacts. Finally it synthesizes findings into a structured report with capability, risk, confidence, and remediation guidance, linking every conclusion to the underlying evidence.

When to use it

  • You receive an unknown PE or suspicious attachment and need an analyst-grade assessment.
  • A SOC analyst needs prioritized detection and containment guidance for a suspicious binary.
  • Threat intel triage: determine if a sample is known malware or a new variant.
  • Prioritize incident response actions after initial containment.
  • Produce defensible findings for stakeholders or to support remediation.

Best practices

  • Always include the raw static outputs (hashes, imports, entropy) as evidence when reporting conclusions.
  • State confidence and justify it with specific findings (APIs, TI detections, packing indicators).
  • If packing or low visibility is detected, recommend dynamic analysis before final attribution.
  • Map APIs and strings to capabilities; avoid asserting capabilities without at least two supporting indicators.
  • Provide concise remediation and detection steps tied to the observed capabilities.

Example use cases

  • Detecting credential theft capability when CryptUnprotectData or browser-related APIs are present.
  • Identifying process injection by correlating VirtualAlloc, VirtualProtect, WriteProcessMemory, CreateRemoteThread.
  • Triage: distinguishing a well-known family (high VT detections + repo hits) from a new obfuscated sample requiring sandboxing.
  • Building IOC lists (hashes, domains, registry keys) for blocking and hunting.
  • Guiding incident response with immediate actions and prioritized detection opportunities.

FAQ

A capability claim should be supported by specific indicators such as API combinations, strings, exported functions, or TI matches; ideally two or more independent pieces of evidence to raise confidence.

How do you treat packed samples?

Packing indicators (high entropy, known packer sections, RWX sections) are flagged and the report states that static findings may reflect the unpacker stub. Recommend dynamic unpacking or sandboxing to reveal the true payload.

Built by
VeilStrat
AI signals for GTM teams
© 2026 VeilStrat. All rights reserved.All systems operational