This is the most garbage article I've ever seen in a while.

Not only does it describe extremely typical malware as "fully undetectable", but the behavior described is about as straightforward and naive (and thus, easily detectable) as possible. There's absolutely nothing unique or clever about the behavior it describes; it sounds like it's describing Baby's First Malware.

If you strip the specific filename out of the article and instead replace it with "named to look like a normal Windows process", then the rest of the article's text accurately describes literally thousands of different pieces of malware: run a script from a Word macro, dump a script file into an out-of-the-way directory, name it so it looks like some normal process, then run it to create a remote shell.