No and the task is probably impossible in principle.
Any such virus would have to be extremely contagious (on par with measles) and extremely deadly. By extremely deadly I don’t mean Ebola, because up to 5% of individuals recover from that, 95% die … and we have a highly effective vaccine for that. HIV comes closer, a full-blown AIDS is invariably fatal, so an HIV that’s airborne sounds like a potent threat, but about 1–10% of people have innate immunity to HIV too.
Rabies is the next candidate, but there are Amazon tribes who have antibodies against the virus without being vaccinated against it, which means they have some sort of innate resistance against rabies.
If you want to wipe out everyone you need to ensure the human population is reduced to below 500 breeding pairs, 1000 individuals. That is the limit where we could well die out due to inbreeding (though even that is not certain). The problem is humans will travel about and if you count on isolation of sub-critical groups you’re in for a rude awakening, because it takes several generations for genetic defects due to inbreeding to manifest to a sufficient extent. You need a virus that is extremely transmissible and deadly in at least 99.99999% of cases and ensure it doesn’t burn itself out somehow (case fatality rate that high implies it kills very quickly and is easy to contain as a result). That is nearly impossible, even before we consider the fact it’s overwhelmingly likely it won’t be able to infect everyone anyway.
There’s too much genetic variability amongst humans to make a virus that deadly in the first place and viruses that deadly are too obvious to run amok anyhow.