Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add meltedinhex/analyst-ai-pack --skill bypassing-anti-vm-and-sandbox-checksgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/meltedinhex/analyst-ai-packWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/meltedinhex/analyst-ai-pack/bypassing-anti-vm-and-sandbox-checks)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/meltedinhex/analyst-ai-pack/bypassing-anti-vm-and-sandbox-checks"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/meltedinhex/analyst-ai-pack/bypassing-anti-vm-and-sandbox-checks/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/meltedinhex/analyst-ai-pack/bypassing-anti-vm-and-sandbox-checks"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/meltedinhex/analyst-ai-pack/bypassing-anti-vm-and-sandbox-checks.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00080 | $0.00723 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00040 | $0.00362 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00145 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
bypassing-anti-vm-and-sandbox-checks scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 12d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 91 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Bypassing Anti-VM and Sandbox Checks
When to Use
- An evasive sample refuses to detonate under analysis and you need to locate and neutralize its anti-VM/sandbox checks (artifact strings, timing stalls, CPUID hypervisor bit, MAC/registry checks).
- You are planning patches or environment hardening to force execution.
Do not use patching as a shortcut that changes malicious logic — patch only the evasion gate. Run only in an isolated, instrumented VM with snapshots.
Prerequisites
- The sample and a debugger/disassembler on an isolated VM.
Safety & Handling
- The sample executes during bypass work; use a disposable, snapshotted, network-controlled VM.
Workflow
Step 1: Locate the evasion checks
python scripts/analyst.py locate sample.bin
Reports offsets of anti-VM artifact strings, timing APIs (GetTickCount, rdtsc), CPUID usage,
and environment-fingerprint APIs to point you at the detection routines.
Step 2: Plan the bypass
For each check decide the approach: patch the conditional jump after the check, hook/stub the API to return benign values, or harden the VM (rename adapters, patch registry, add fake processes).
Step 3: Apply and verify
Patch the gate (e.g., force the "not detected" branch) and confirm the sample proceeds past the check.
Step 4: Document
Record each check, its offset, and the bypass applied for reproducibility.
Validation
- Each located check maps to a real detection primitive (string/timing/CPUID/API).
- The patched/hooked gate provably lets execution continue.
- Only the evasion gate is altered, not the payload logic.
Pitfalls
- Multiple layered checks — bypassing one is not enough.
- Timing checks needing instruction-accurate handling (
rdtscdeltas). - Anti-tamper detecting the patch; prefer hooking returns over byte patches when fragile.
References
- See
references/api-reference.mdfor the locator. - ATT&CK T1497 and the CPUID hypervisor bit reference (linked in frontmatter).
What ships with it
3 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 12d ago First seen · 91 lines · 80 tokens per session scan A 624a8342142d
bypassing-anti-vm-and-sandbox-checks is a skill published in the GitHub repository meltedinhex/analyst-ai-pack (22 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 80 tokens to every session and 723 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
analyzing-golang-malware-with-ghidra
Reverse engineer Go-compiled malware in Ghidra by parsing Go buildinfo and pclntab structures, recovering stripped/obfuscated function names (e.g. via GoResolver), and extracting embedded module/dependency strings and types from Go binaries. Use when analyzing a Go-language malware sample, deobfuscating a…
analyzing-malicious-pdf-with-peepdf
Perform static analysis of malicious PDF documents using peepdf, pdfid, and pdf-parser to extract embedded JavaScript, shellcode, and suspicious objects. Use when triaging a suspicious PDF attachment from a phishing email, analyzing a PDF-based exploit document, or building detection signatures for weaponized PDF…
dynamic-malware-analysis
Execute and analyze malware samples within a highly controlled, instrumented sandbox environment to observe their true behavior, network communications, file system modifications, and registry changes in real-time.
analyzing-malicious-pdf-with-peepdf
A Chinese-language skill for examining suspicious PDF files with peepdf, pdfid, and pdf-parser. It is intended for static malware analysis, which studies a file without running it.
analyzing-malicious-pdf-with-peepdf
Perform static analysis of malicious PDF documents using peepdf, pdfid, and pdf-parser to extract embedded JavaScript, shellcode, and suspicious objects.
analyzing-malicious-pdf-with-peepdf
Perform static analysis of malicious PDF documents using peepdf, pdfid, and pdf-parser to extract embedded JavaScript, shellcode, and suspicious objects.