[Kinanizer]

If you need it fast you can just find a source and make it FUD again.

Agreed. But if you want it to be the best, pay someone $250 ish to make you a private crypter in C++ for the strongest, and longest FUD Crypt.

Hell no, I could buy a good one for that price.

Hence what being privately coded means. You wont be put on some public crypter which will get detected in the shortest time, you will have your own private crypting methods and if you're not stupid with it, you could stay FUD for weeks. That's why you'd pay that kind of money.

1.) There are good paid ones that stay FUD for a long enough while
2.) This thread is about me making one, not me paying someone to do that.

[BreShiE]

If you need it fast you can just find a source and make it FUD again.

Agreed. But if you want it to be the best, pay someone $250 ish to make you a private crypter in C++ for the strongest, and longest FUD Crypt.

Hell no, I could buy a good one for that price.

Hence what being privately coded means. You wont be put on some public crypter which will get detected in the shortest time, you will have your own private crypting methods and if you're not stupid with it, you could stay FUD for weeks. That's why you'd pay that kind of money.

1.) There are good paid ones that stay FUD for a long enough while
2.) This thread is about me making one, not me paying someone to do that.

No, there really isn't. You keep thinking that. Good look making a crypter, lol.

[w00t]

If you have a custom crypter and you hire the right person, the crypter will be damn near permanently FUD.

As for making it, be sure to encrypt the unencrypted data back into the stub with a different key each time.

[Phytrix]

If you have a custom crypter and you hire the right person, the crypter will be damn near permanently FUD.

As for making it, be sure to encrypt the unencrypted data back into the stub with a different key each time.

No such thing as a perm or near perm crypter. You infect someone, they scan their system properly (looking at logs), and then it's not FUD anymore.
Even if you make the malware meta or polymorphic, it won't make it perm or near perm.

[Kinanizer]

Agreed. But if you want it to be the best, pay someone $250 ish to make you a private crypter in C++ for the strongest, and longest FUD Crypt.

Hell no, I could buy a good one for that price.

Hence what being privately coded means. You wont be put on some public crypter which will get detected in the shortest time, you will have your own private crypting methods and if you're not stupid with it, you could stay FUD for weeks. That's why you'd pay that kind of money.

1.) There are good paid ones that stay FUD for a long enough while
2.) This thread is about me making one, not me paying someone to do that.

No, there really isn't. You keep thinking that. Good look making a crypter, lol.

Thanks, I'll need it.

[w00t]

If you have a custom crypter and you hire the right person, the crypter will be damn near permanently FUD.

As for making it, be sure to encrypt the unencrypted data back into the stub with a different key each time.

No such thing as a perm or near perm crypter. You infect someone, they scan their system properly (looking at logs), and then it's not FUD anymore.
Even if you make the malware meta or polymorphic, it won't make it perm or near perm.

Yes, if a file is found to be a virus, it can be removed. But then if a file with a completely different signature with the same virus is introduced, so long as the stub keeps to functions with legitimate use in other programs, the new file will be UD.

[Phytrix]

If you have a custom crypter and you hire the right person, the crypter will be damn near permanently FUD.

As for making it, be sure to encrypt the unencrypted data back into the stub with a different key each time.

No such thing as a perm or near perm crypter. You infect someone, they scan their system properly (looking at logs), and then it's not FUD anymore.
Even if you make the malware meta or polymorphic, it won't make it perm or near perm.

Yes, if a file is found to be a virus, it can be removed. But then if a file with a completely different signature with the same virus is introduced, so long as the stub keeps to functions with legitimate use in other programs, the new file will be UD.

The AV/AM companies look at the programming and then make it recognise all variations of that virus (using the algorithms) as malicious.

[Ultimatum]

What w00t means is make the crypter polymorphic, which would mean a different key, etc, would be used every time during execution.

I can't help you with this, you can't make one or FUD one unless you know coding, the basics of crypters, and a private method.

[Phytrix]

What w00t means is make the crypter polymorphic, which would mean a different key, etc, would be used every time during execution.

I can't help you with this, you can't make one or FUD one unless you know coding, the basics of crypters, and a private method.

Each key would have to be generated from the execution code, which AM/AVs target when looking at polymorphic infections.

[w00t]

Not only is that not what happens, it isn't possible. Even if you were to somehow signature all possible encryptions of a virus and use some currently undeveloped compression scheme to let you send it, a good crypter could simply use a different scheme.