Prevalence and Impact of Low-Entropy Packing Schemes in the Malware Ecosystem
Alessandro Mantovani, Simone Aonzo, Xabier Ugarte-Pedrero, Alessio Merlo, Davide Balzarotti
Abstract
—An open research problem on malware analysis is how to statically distinguish between packed and non-packed executables. This has an impact on antivirus software and malware analysis systems, which may need to apply different heuristics or to resort to more costly code emulation solutions to deal with the presence of potential packing routines. It can also affect the results of many research studies in which the authors adopt algorithms that are specifically designed for packed or non-packed binaries. Therefore, a wrong answer to the question “is this executable packed?” can make the difference between malware evasion and detection. It has long been known that packing and entropy are strongly correlated, often leading to the wrong assumption that a low entropy score implies that an executable is NOT packed. Exceptions to this rule exist, but they have always been considered as one-off cases, with a negligible impact on any large scale experiment. However, if such an assumption might have been acceptable in the past, our experiments show that this is not the case anymore as an increasing and remarkable number of packed malware samples implement proper schemes to keep their entropy low. In this paper, we empirically investigate and measure this problem by analyzing a dataset of 50K low-entropy Windows malware samples. Our tests show that, despite all samples have a low entropy value, over 30% of them adopt some form of runtime packing. We then extended our analysis beyond the pure entropy, by considering all static features that have been proposed so far to identify packed code. Again, our tests show that even a state of the art machine learning classifier is unable to conclude whether a
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers11
- Obfuscation-Resilient Executable Payload Extraction From Packed MalwareBinlin Cheng, Jiang Ming, Erika A. Leal, Haotian Zhang et al.USENIX Security 2021 · 29 citations
- SYMBEXCEL: Automated Analysis and Understanding of Malicious Excel 4.0 MacrosNicola Ruaro, Fabio Pagani, Stefano Ortolani, Christopher Kruegel et al.S&P 2022 · 12 citations
- PackGenome: Automatically Generating Robust YARA Rules for Accurate Malware Packer DetectionShijia Li, Jiang Ming, Pengda Qiu, Qiyuan Chen et al.CCS 2023 · 10 citations
- KEENHash: Hashing Programs into Function-Aware Embeddings for Large-Scale Binary Code Similarity AnalysisZhijie Liu, Qiyi Tang, Sen Nie, Shi Wu et al.ISSTA 2025 · 1 citation
- Hiding Critical Program Components via Ambiguous TranslationChijung Jung, Doowon Kim, An Chen, Weihang Wang et al.ICSE 2022 · 1 citation
Builds on1
Related papers
- When Malware is Packin' Heat; Limits of Machine Learning Classifiers Based on Static Analysis FeaturesHojjat Aghakhani, Fabio Gritti, Francesco Mecca, Martina Lindorfer et al.NDSS 2020
- Adversarially Robust Assembly Language Model for Packed Executables DetectionShijia Li, Jiang Ming, Lanqing Liu, Longwei Yang et al.CCS 2025
- Things You May Not Know About Android (Un)Packers: A Systematic Study based on Whole-System EmulationYue Duan, Mu Zhang, Abhishek Vasisht Bhaskar, Heng Yin et al.NDSS 2018 · 87 citations
- Decoding the Secrets of Machine Learning in Malware Classification: A Deep Dive into Datasets, Feature Extraction, and Model PerformanceSavino Dambra, Yufei Han, Simone Aonzo, Platon Kotzias et al.CCS 2023 · 28 citations
- Does Every Second Count? Time-based Evolution of Malware Behavior in SandboxesAlexander Küchler, Alessandro Mantovani, Yufei Han, Leyla Bilge et al.NDSS 2021
