But then again I'm not even sure if BoClean detects all these changes, so it still may not detect it. unless it was added to the start up list, new drivers were added, altered the reg in some way etc. The way things look now, I don't think it would.

So I wonder if BoClean could then detect a modified version of MUK that was made to be much stealthier. But I'm pretty sure BoClean did not detect it before the program was sent in. The only reason BoClean is detecting MUK right now is because someone submitted the program to them so they could add the sigs for it. It is very possible to create a keylogger that would be completely undetectable to all available anti-malware scanners. So if all the same old techniques are used then why is it possible for the so-called holy father to come out with these rootkits that cannot be detected with ANY of the current anti-malware programs? So Kevin is partly right, but to be completely honest he is not 100% correct that all the same old techniques are used.

While it is true that certain things will remain the same as far as malware goes, such as new drivers being installed and new start up entries added and what not, but still there are undetectable forms of malware right now! Click to expand.I realize Kevin from BoClean has told you that nearly all malware is just repackaged forms of older things, but I have to disagree.

Free unhackme evolution