From: jnf (jnfnosec.net)
Date: Sat Mar 04 2006 - 12:51:00 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

I'm curious how this works exactly as I have written a similar but
probably not as pretty tool, I haven't extended it to read a memory dump
for anything but a windows box. That said, I focused only on the process
list (and yes i know it will miss dkom).

I noticed that it was problematic getting most things beyond rudimentary
informationm, which the PEB being what it is caused some problems as a
result (i dont track things down in swap).

I also found that as of 2003, a dd of the physical memory object caused
the pointers in the linked list to get zero'd out, so even though I was
able to find the correct address of the linked list, I wasn't able to walk
it.

How has your tool dealt with these and similar issues?

--

There are only two choices in life. You either conform the truth to your desire,
or you conform your desire to the truth. Which choice are you making?

On Fri, 3 Mar 2006, Nick Petroni wrote:

> Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 17:32:34 -0500 (EST)
> From: Nick Petroni <npetronics.umd.edu>
> To: dailydavelists.immunitysec.com
> Cc: awalters4tphi.net
> Subject: Re: [Dailydave] Memory, Elephantine
>
> While on the topic of memory forensics, the Python enthusiasts in
> the crowd may be interested in a new extensible research framework for
> analyzing volatile memory images that we will be releasing at an upcoming
> (yet to be determined) venue.
>
> For more information, check out: http://www.4tphi.net/fatkit/
>
> peace,
> nick
>
>
> On Fri, 3 Mar 2006, Dave Aitel wrote:
>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > I think it's interesting that Maniant (aka RedCliff) released a memory
> > forensics tool recently (http://www.mandiant.com/features.htm) - this
> > is also something we see people doing a lot more with CANVAS these
> > days. The main benefits of using an exploitation framework for such
> > things is that:
> > 1. We can use the same exploitation path an attacker would use to
> > obtain access to the machine. This means we're completely in memory
> > and haven't messed up the disk at all. (Or we can remotely install as
> > a service, copy a file over, whatever.)
> > 2. You get the power of MOSDEF for doing the hard work...i.e. you can
> > inject into processes, grab all the memory on the system from every
> > process, etc.
> >
> > Of course, the downside is that you have to use MOSDEF to do the hard
> > work. :>
> >
> > The other side of the story is that as an exploitation framework, you
> > now need to clean/encrypt memory up as you go along. And you can do
> > "remote forensics" as you go - I can look at other processes and see
> > if someone else is also using CANVAS or anything similar on this box...
> >
> > - -dave
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
> > Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> >
> > iD8DBQFECH9pB8JNm+PA+iURAvJpAJ48qV13TcPpRiFXXu1yWCsffoQxpQCcDOBf
> > 37ykn9FpdVIJbVClewwiKLo=
> > =lYqp
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
>
>
>
>
>

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]