A consultant modifies a specialized build script to run malicious instructions at runtime, relying on a built-in compile utility on a Windows system. This approach does not produce an artifact on disk but executes from memory. Which method accomplishes this goal?
Inserting hidden macros in common text files to initiate code execution
Loading scripts through a standard interpreter that ships with the operating system
Transporting a precompiled command-line tool from another environment
Embedding instructions in a specialized build file and using the local compile tool
Embedding malicious instructions in a custom build file and invoking the system’s compile utility executes code in memory, leaving no compiled artifact behind. Deploying a precompiled application leaves an artifact on the target, which is more noticeable. Loading scripts through an operating system interpreter does not involve the compile process. Inserting hidden macros in standard text documents is unrelated to a specialized build script.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is a compile utility, and how does it work?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why does executing code in memory leave fewer traces?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does embedding malicious instructions in a build script differ from using precompiled tools?