Methodology for Malware Scripting Analysis in Controlled Environments Based on Open Source Tools

  • Diego MuñozEmail author
  • David CorderoEmail author
  • Cristian Barría HuidobroEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 1053)


In today’s interconnected world, there is a latent threat called malware or malicious software. Different variations of these polymorphic and metamorphic malware continue to evolve, even becoming large industries called Malware as a Service (MaaS) [1]. This combined with the large number of new technologies has evolved along with different threats, which can seriously damage from a workstation, to large network architectures [2]. In order to face it, it is necessary to be able to analyze and understand its operation, for this reason to carry out this task a defined methodology is necessary. This paper proposes a methodological structure for working with malware scripting, for which a detailed example of practical application in a controlled environment is illustrated. After the analysis of the results obtained, a concept map is offered with the stages and activities related to the proposed methodology.

The present investigation provides an adequate look for the rapid analysis of malicious scripts, which allows decisions to be made during situations of IT crisis, which in turn will be the basis for a thorough further analysis.

In order to start with any type of analysis, it is important to establish a working methodology or framework to be able to carry out a sample study of some type of malware scripting, also considering identifying its classification, based on “Malware Analysis and Classification: A Survey” [3].


Malware scripting Static analysis Dynamic analysis Methodology 


  1. 1.
    Gutmann, P.: The commercial malware industry. In: DEFCON Conference (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baltimore, B.: Baltimore’s out-of-date and underfunded IT system was ripe for ransomware attack (2019)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Gandotra, E., et al.: Malware analysis and classification: a survey. J. Inf. Secur. 5, 56–64 (2014). Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mieres, J.: Ataques informáticos. Debilidades de seguridad comúnmente explotadas. Recuperado (2009).
  6. 6.
    Mitnick, K.: The Art of Invisibility: The World’s Most Famous Hacker Teaches You How to be Safe in the Age of Big Brother and Big Data. Hachette, UK (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gómez, J., Villar, E.: Introducción a la virtualización (2018)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fedorenko, E., Ivanova, A., Dhamala, R., Bers, M.U. The Language of Programming: A Cognitive Perspective. Trends in cognitive sciences (2019)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sikorski, M., Honig, A.: Practical Malware Analysis: The Hands-On Guide to Dissecting Malicious Software (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pandey, S., Mehtre, B.: Performance of malware detection tools: a comparison. In: 2014 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Communications, Control and Computing Technologies, pp. 1811–1817. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Uppal, D., Mehra, V., Verma, V.: Basic survey on malware analysis, tools and techniques. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Appl. (IJCSA) 4(1), 103 (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centro de Investigación en CiberseguridadUniversidad MayorSantiagoChile

Personalised recommendations