Is 6daf86ece4f221724a1373d246d7c19b396a16bd42edd1d32ac627beeb4b70931.jar Safe? JAR Virus and Malware Scan Report

[!WARNING]
Final verdict available at the end of this report.

What This JAR Scanner Found

The scan examined 1 844 classes (all successfully decompiled) and identified 38 decompiler anomalies (≈2 % of classes). Most of these anomalies are “stack underflow” warnings that usually appear when code is heavily obfuscated – short class and method names, missing local‑variable tables, etc.

The scanner also flagged a large number of file‑access, reflection, class‑loader and base‑64 API uses (over 150 hard‑to‑review indicators) and four hard‑coded external URLs. Outbound connections were seen to:

http://fapcraft.org/assets/video/tutorial/girl_wand.mp4
https://sessionserver.mojang.com/session/minecraft/profile/ (Mojang’s official profile service)
http://javax.xml.XMLConstants/feature/secure-processing (a generic XML constant URL)

No explicit signatures of credential theft, hidden payload download, process execution, or system persistence were reported.

Questions the Full Report Answers

Does the JAR try to contact external servers, and if so, what are they?
Are the suspicious signals coming from the mod’s own code or from bundled third‑party libraries?
Is there any evidence of classic malware behavior such as credential stealing or hidden downloads?
How much of the code could be inspected, and what parts were hard to analyze?

Malware and Virus Findings

No high‑signal malicious behavior was detected. The scan did not find any code that reads passwords, writes to the system registry, spawns new processes, or silently downloads additional files.

RAT Detection

The evidence does not match a Remote‑Access Trojan. There is no persistent back‑door, command‑execution channel, or remote‑control logic identified in the core code.

Suspicious Classes and Evidence

Core JAR or Mod Code

Class	Severity	Behavior	Evidence
`com.trolmastercard.sexmod.Main`	Low	Reads/writes configuration files	`java_io_file_api`
`com.trolmastercard.sexmod.a`	Medium	Loads a video from `fapcraft.org`	Hard‑coded URL, file I/O, reflection
`com.trolmastercard.sexmod.f0`	Medium	Calls Mojang session API	Hard‑coded URL to `sessionserver.mojang.com`
`com.trolmastercard.sexmod.br`	Low	Various string/file utilities	File‑API usage
Many other `com.trolmastercard.sexmod.*` classes	Low‑Medium	Heavy use of reflection, class‑loader, base64, file I/O	Marked as “hard_to_review_code_api” and “stack_underflow”

Bundled Third‑Party Libraries

Class	Severity	Behavior	Evidence
`org.apache.commons.lang3.*`	Low	General utility functions	Reflection & class‑loader usage (common in shaded libs)
`software.bernie.shadowed.*` (Jackson, Geckolib, etc.)	Low	JSON handling, resource loading, geometry	File‑API, outbound URL handling (e.g., loading resources)
`software.bernie.shadowed.fasterxml.jackson.*`	Low	JSON parsing/serialization	Network & file APIs for reading/writing JSON

Network Activity

http://fapcraft.org/assets/video/tutorial/girl_wand.mp4 – likely a media asset the mod wants to display.
https://sessionserver.mojang.com/session/minecraft/profile/ – standard Mojang API used by many Minecraft mods to fetch player profiles.
http://javax.xml.XMLConstants/feature/secure-processing – a generic XML‑related URL, not a malicious endpoint.

No other unknown domains or IP addresses were observed.

Deobfuscation and Analysis Coverage

All 1 844 classes were decompiled, but 38 classes triggered fallback decompilation due to stack‑underflow errors, giving them an obfuscation score of up to 6. This indicates the original author deliberately shortened names and stripped debug information, which makes static analysis harder but does not automatically imply malicious intent.

Is This Minecraft Mod Safe?

The JAR appears to be a Minecraft mod (package name com.trolmastercard.sexmod). Its purpose seems to be adding adult‑themed content (the name “sexmod” and the video URL). The code heavily uses reflection and file I/O, typical for mods that load resources, configurations, or custom assets.

What Looks Normal

Access to the Mojang session server – normal for fetching player data.
Use of Apache Commons, Jackson, and GeckoLib – common libraries bundled in many mods.
File‑API calls for reading configuration files or resource packs.
Telemetry‑style URLs (e.g., the video file) that are part of the mod’s feature set.

What Is Dangerous

The hard‑coded URL to fapcraft.org points to an adult video. If you do not want such content, this is a concern.
Heavy obfuscation (short names, missing debug tables) makes it harder to verify that no hidden malicious logic exists.
Numerous reflection and class‑loader calls can be used to load code dynamically; the scan could not fully verify what is being loaded at runtime.

What Should You Do?

If you are comfortable with adult‑themed Minecraft mods and trust the source, you may use the JAR but keep an eye on outbound network traffic.
If you prefer to avoid external media downloads, consider removing or disabling the part of the mod that loads the girl_wand.mp4 video (e.g., edit the config or block the URL).
If you are uncertain about the obfuscation, run the JAR in a sandbox or on a test server first to observe its behavior.

Scan Limitations

Static analysis can highlight suspicious patterns, but it cannot guarantee that hidden or dynamically loaded code is safe. Runtime behavior (network traffic, file writes) may reveal additional concerns that the scanner cannot see.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can a JAR file contain a virus?

Yes. A JAR can hold malicious Java bytecode that runs when the JAR is loaded, but many JARs are perfectly benign.

How do I check whether a JAR file is safe?

Combine static scanning (like the report above) with dynamic testing: run the JAR in a sandbox, monitor network traffic, and watch file system changes.

Can this scanner detect a Minecraft RAT?

It can flag typical RAT behaviors (remote command execution, hidden downloads, credential theft). In this case, no RAT‑like activity was found.

Does obfuscation mean a JAR is malicious?

Not necessarily. Obfuscation is often used to protect intellectual property or reduce size, but it also makes analysis harder. Context matters.

Final JAR Safety Verdict

Verdict: Use caution
Risk level: Medium
Confidence: Moderate

Should I trust this JAR, and why?
The mod does not contain clear malware signatures such as credential stealing, hidden payloads, or system‑level attacks. Most of the flagged behavior stems from normal mod activities (resource loading, Mojang API calls) and from bundled third‑party libraries. However, the presence of an adult‑content video URL and extensive obfuscation means the exact runtime actions are not fully transparent. If you are comfortable with the mod’s theme and willing to monitor its network activity, you may use it, but do so with caution and preferably in a controlled environment.