Using a USB memory stick that was frequently used on a Trojan-infected PC on an uninfected offline Windows 10 PC. Physically, the PC has no wireless adapter, so it cannot be connected to wifi. Bluetooth is present but disabled in the device manager.

The hacker is an ATP hacker.

Is it possible to prevent remote-control malware infections such as Trojan horses?

  • "Prevent infections"? No. but will a RAT work without a network? No. Can non-RAT malware cause damage? Yes.
    – schroeder
    Aug 5 at 17:47

1 Answer 1


Just employ logic.

Using a USB memory that was frequently used on a Trojan-infected PC on an uninfected offline PC

Obviously connecting an infected USB stick to a clean device may result in that device becoming infected. Whether or not it is offline does not really matter here.

remote control malware

Your offline PC is infected. This is not your PC any longer. However, the PC is offline, so the malware cannot receive instructions from its owners over the network. It may, however, have already come with its own set of instructions, in which case it will do whatever it was programmed to do.


bluetooth is present but disabled in the device manager)

Then the malware re-enables bluetooth and might listen to further instructions over bluetooth, however this obviously requires that whatever is sending these instructions must be in close proximity to your PC.

The hacker is an ATP hacker.

Seriously? You worry about being specifically targeted by APT? And you ask questions on this site?

  • It is most likely that your worries are unfounded and no APT is targeting you.
  • If, however, you are indeed targeted by APT then you have a big BIG problem and resources such as this site are not going to help you. Basically you are screwed unless you can hire comparably badass defenders, which you can't, or else you'd do that rather than waste your time here. Forget your offline PCs, start looking for hidden cameras and microphones in your room and agents following you on the street.
  • @EsaJokinen I removed the last part since its proven controversial... though it was not intended to be mockery.
    – gaazkam
    Aug 5 at 8:12
  • Great! Although not intentional, it sounded like it. Aug 5 at 8:15
  • I was thinking about an APT scenario where the offline PC had the keys for a Bitcoin wallet the Lazarus Group was after. Even in that case they would not be using an infected USB stick, as it would be more efficient to just access the PC physically or even steal the entire computer. Aug 5 at 8:19
  • gaazkam,I can't explain the situation here,but a APT hacker are a relative.There is only one culprit. We don't live in the same place. even if I insert a USB and get infected, can I assume that the RAT can no longer be used by removing the bluetooth adapter from the PC and never using that USB again?
    – john-trmb
    Aug 6 at 0:33
  • @john-trmb I am not sure if you understand what 'APT hacker' means. Please read this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_persistent_threat Once again, almost by definition, APT means a threat so badass that you cannot defend against it if you're just an ordinary citizen; and if you were not just an ordinary citizen then you wouldn't be posting here, asking for help. If APT cannot get you by means of an infected USB they will get you by a gazillion of other means that you cannot stop.
    – gaazkam
    Aug 6 at 5:26

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .