hack tool win 32 auto kms ?

[tizzio]

i need to know if i can ignore the warn of windows defender or not , wen i try to active some trainers it say : hack tool win 32 auto kms , it is safe ? do i risk anything by allowing that trainer to get active , please tell me, i am not an hacker , i can guess that's a part of what a trainer need to work properly but it could also be something to protect myself from

[jakey1995abc]

Sounds like the tool that is used to crack Microsoft software. Are you running a cracked version of windows or Microsoft Office by any chance?

[Vee_]

i need to know if i can ignore the warn of windows defender or not , wen i try to active some trainers it say : hack tool win 32 auto kms , it is safe ? do i risk anything by allowing that trainer to get active , please tell me, i am not an hacker , i can guess that's a part of what a trainer need to work properly but it could also be something to protect myself from

auto kms is microsoft activator, sort of keygen(?) for microsoft products (windows/office). Personally, this is false flag made by windows defender, in other words auto kms is safe (most of it, tho some of those are genuinly rootkit/virus/spyware).
Actually depends on how you obtain your ms products, is someone installed it for you or you get your windows product from official store (Obviously if you get it from official store there wouldn't be Auto KMS in your windows installation).

EDIT:
And yeah, Auto KMS is not a Trainer. Windows Defender explain it self, Auto KMS is a hack tool to "hack" your windows installation. Mostly to activate your windows products.

[Deepthroat]

i need to know if i can ignore the warn of windows defender or not , wen i try to active some trainers it say : hack tool win 32 auto kms , it is safe ? do i risk anything by allowing that trainer to get active , please tell me, i am not an hacker , i can guess that's a part of what a trainer need to work properly but it could also be something to protect myself from

auto kms is microsoft activator, sort of keygen(?) for microsoft products (windows/office). Personally, this is false flag made by windows defender, in other words auto kms is safe (most of it, tho some of those are genuinly rootkit/virus/spyware).
Actually depends on how you obtain your ms products, is someone installed it for you or you get your windows product from official store (Obviously if you get it from official store there wouldn't be Auto KMS in your windows installation).

This is false, as KMS is used for bulk activations in the Enterprise Sector (only, not available for Home Users at all), and Microsoft Windows Defender doesn't detect the legit services from Microsoft as they're the first to get white-listed.
The warning OP is getting is for using a KMS Activator (and no this is not from Microsoft) on Windows! Meaning he doesn't have a legit copy of Windows, has nothing to do with trainers.

[tizzio]

so in short i can activate this trainer without worry , thanks

[tizzio]

Sounds like the tool that is used to crack Microsoft software. Are you running a cracked version of windows or Microsoft Office by any chance?

it is possible , but again , i get this warning only wen i try to active some trainers , not every trainer is deleted by windows defender with this warning when i try to activate it, and one of the trainers from this site trigger this warning and the immediate cancellation of the trainer , but since i already read somewere that sometimes the trainers need to use the same kind of features that virus uses , this could be a false negative , but i need to be sure since i am not an hacker , if i remember correctly it happened with a trainer for crash n sane trilogy

[koderkrazy]

If you can, try to get CT. You can set hotkeys to cheats like trainers. You can use it like trainer.
Also we can see the code before running it.

[tizzio]

yup , i have cheat engine of course , infact the problem depend on the fact that this is a stand alone trainer and it is the only one with the features i am looking for , the current cheat tables for crash n sane trilogy are actually work in progress , so for now that trainer is the most complete program existent, fortunately i found again the page of the trainer that trigger this warning : viewtopic.php?t=7420

[Vee_]

Checked that trainer your mentioned, here is [Link] result, as you can see this is a "trouble" when using trainers, most anti virus detect it as a virus. Well, it is a virus actually lol.
Because simply, it works in background and manipulate the game function(s). But, worry not it will not hack your entire computer or even destroy it
Just whitelist the trainer from whatever anti virus you use or just disable your av while you play your game.

[koderkrazy]

Well, it is a virus actually lol.

It's subjective . Half of the antivirus in your link are not considering it as virus..

In the end it all comes down to how much do you trust the source(where you are getting the trainer). Also, see if it's rated positive by others.
And , upon running the trainer if Windows ask you to give permission to network access then delete it immediately.

[TimFun13]

...Well, it is a virus actually lol...

Technically, it's only a virus if it self replicates.

...
And , upon running the trainer if Windows ask you to give permission to network access then delete it immediately.

And much like most publishers, many trainer makers go with the "software as a service" model. A very common question on CEF is how you download and execute code from a server.


The best part is when you consider the fact that most antivirus software has a 40% or higher false negative ratting, meaning 40% of the stuff it says isn't malicious is in fact malicious code. And also they tend to have a 60-80% false positive ratings. (EDIT: this is based on a 7 year old study, no idea what the numbers are now; but in this study "Node 32" scored the best, but was the least known and used).

[koderkrazy]

And much like most publishers, many trainer makers go with the "software as a service" model. A very common question on CEF is how you download and execute code from a server.

So basically they can run whatever code from server using trainer running with admin privileges?

The best part is when you consider the fact that most antivirus software has a 40% or higher false negative ratting, meaning 40% of the stuff it says isn't malicious is in fact malicious code.

True, if I obfuscate my C# compiled output exe, MalwareByte on same machine deletes it saying PUP(potentially unwanted program)..

[TimFun13]

...
So basically they can run whatever code from server using trainer running with admin privileges?
...

Exactly, that's why I'm not a fan of it. But to be fair, the thinking is that this also helps the user because they don't have to reinstall the trainer for every update or code change. But as you pointed out, it gives someone a lot of power on your machine.

[Deepthroat]

Checked that trainer your mentioned, here is [Link] result, as you can see this is a "trouble" when using trainers, most anti virus detect it as a virus. Well, it is a virus actually lol.
Because simply, it works in background and manipulate the game function(s). But, worry not it will not hack your entire computer or even destroy it :lol:
Just whitelist the trainer from whatever anti virus you use or just disable your av while you play your game.

They didn't detect as Virus, but detected it as a Trainer (Cheat Engine). As we can see none of them got reported as a KMS Tool, which prove further that warning is not coming from the Trainer.
Either way I'll download the Trainer and test it myself to confirm it's not related to the KMS detection OP is getting.
And as tested it's clean, not even the behavior blocker detected anything suspicious, [Link]

Technically, it's only a virus if it self replicates.

A TH that replicates itself normally, there's multiple types of Virus and not all replicate (most of them will download a payload, that is when the real damage gets done, but replicate? Not all.).

The best part is when you consider the fact that most antivirus software has a 40% or higher false negative ratting, meaning 40% of the stuff it says isn't malicious is in fact malicious code. And also they tend to have a 60-80% false positive ratings. (EDIT: this is based on a 7 year old study, no idea what the numbers are now; but in this study "Node 32" scored the best, but was the least known and used).

This is false, FP rates are way below 5% in most Anti-Virus programs (not to mention one product result is hardly a benchmark, which makes your logic flawed).
If you guys want a real benchmark for FPs check this, [Link]
Windows Defender is actually one of the few that fall short in FPs, not to mention it has buggy exception rules.

[TimFun13]

...

Technically, it's only a virus if it self replicates.

A TH that replicates itself normally, there's multiple types of Virus and not all replicate.

The best part is when you consider the fact that most antivirus software has a 40% or higher false negative ratting, meaning 40% of the stuff it says isn't malicious is in fact malicious code. And also they tend to have a 60-80% false positive ratings. (EDIT: this is based on a 7 year old study, no idea what the numbers are now; but in this study "Node 32" scored the best, but was the least known and used).

This is false nowadays, FP rates are way below 5% nowadays in most Anti-Virus programs, Windows Defender being one the few that fall short (a little obfuscation is enough to trigger a WD FP).
WD is actually quite annoying as it has buggy exceptions rules and is sensitive to FP, lost count of how many programs (made by me) I had to sent to Microsoft for whitelisting.

[Link]
"A computer virus is a type of malicious software that, when executed, replicates itself by modifying other computer programs and inserting its own code. When this replication succeeds, the affected areas are then said to be "infected" with a computer virus."

You might be thinking of worms or some other malicious code, but to be a virus it has to self replicate; that's even where the name comes from. I get that it's used incorrectly all the time, but that doesn't make it correct.

And like I said it was like 7 years ago that I read that study (couldn't find it to post). I could only find articles and studies that seemed to be more interested in selling AV software and not really study it; and these gave MS a 3% FP rating. But I don't have accesses to the same libraries anymore (like JSTOR). So it's hard to say.