Skip to content

Conversation

@YungBinary
Copy link
Contributor

Additional Rhadamanthys patterns

@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello @YungBinary, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request enhances the detection logic for the Rhadamanthys Loader by incorporating additional YARA patterns. It also updates the author metadata for the YARA rule to reflect contributions.

Highlights

  • YARA Rule Enhancement: Added two new YARA string patterns, $beef and $config_2, to the Rhadamanthys rule to improve detection capabilities for the Rhadamanthys Loader.
  • Author Attribution: Updated the author metadata in the Rhadamanthys YARA rule to include YungBinary.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

@YungBinary YungBinary changed the title Additional Rhadamanthys patterns Rhadamanthys Yara Rule Update Oct 31, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request adds two new patterns to the Rhadamanthys YARA rule to improve detection and credits a new author. One of the new patterns, $beef, appears to be strong and specific. However, the other new pattern, $config_2, is somewhat generic due to a high number of wildcards, which could potentially lead to false positives. I have added a comment with a suggestion to make it more specific if possible.

$code = {8B 4D FC 3B CF 8B C1 74 0D 83 78 04 02 74 1C 8B 40 1C 3B C7 75 F3 3B CF 8B C1 74 57 83 78 04 17 74 09 8B 40 1C 3B C7 75 F3 EB}
$conf = {46 BB FF 00 00 00 23 F3 0F B6 44 31 08 03 F8 23 FB 0F B6 5C 39 08 88 5C 31 08 88 44 39 08 02 C3 8B 5D 08 0F B6 C0 8A 44 08 08}
$beef = { 57 8D 44 33 FC 53 83 C6 FC 50 56 E8 ?? ?? ?? ?? 83 C4 10 66 81 3F EF BE 0F 85 E6 02 00 00 }
$config_2 = { 0F B6 4F 2A 8D 77 2A 33 C0 6A 03 89 ?? ?? 89 ?? ?? 89 ?? ?? 8B C1 }
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

medium

The new string $config_2 seems a bit generic due to the repeated use of 89 ?? ??. This pattern corresponds to a 3-byte mov instruction like mov [reg+disp8], reg, where both the registers and the displacement are wildcards. With 6 wildcard bytes out of 19 total, this string might be prone to false positives, especially with a 2 of them condition.

Could this be made more specific by filling in some of the ?? bytes if the registers or displacements are constant across samples? A more specific signature would improve the reliability of the detection.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant