I would like to replicate an error a client is receiving 'access is denied' on Powershell when they run my binary. Seems like they have some restrictions. I don't know what are there actual restrictions. I tried to block unsigned apps from 'Local Security Policy' and 'App & Browser Control', however I am still able to run unsigned binary in my Powershell (not run as Administrator).
Any help is appreciated.
Related
When an exploit is run the run metsvc command gives an error stating that it cannot open the service manager... Any way around it?... I have tried persistence as well. That too says ERROR in script: operation failed: Access denied?... Any help would be grateful..
You must be trying to install a backdoor on a windows 8/8.1/10 machine. You will always get access denied , since after windows 7 they have made patch around it, only administrator can get this access. And as far as I know there is no simple way to get the admin access on a windows 8 and afterwards machine with metasploit.
just got mine to work. run the payload first used to access the target maching as administrator
I have a VB6 application I am trying to get working on a Windows 7 environment, however every time I start the application, I get the error:
"Component 'ComCt332.ocx' or one of its dependencies not correctly registered: a file is missing or invalid".
To resolve, I have tried to register the comct332.ocx file by running the regsvr32 in the Command Prompt in Administrator Mode but then I get the error:
"The module "comct332.ocx" was loaded but the call to DllRegisterServer failed with error code 0x80004005"
Other things I have tried include:
Deleting all parent nodes in the registry where 'comct332.ocx' exists
and running regsvr32 again in Admin Mode. Same result.
I granted admin permission to another user on the PC and I could register the
file successfully, and the application starts and runs successfully!
However when I log in as the previous user again, it fails miserably.
Any help, thoughts, other-things-to-try will be much appreicated. Thanks
If you have been keeping up on things as you must if you are to continue using VB6 successfully there are a number of things you'll be aware of.
One of these is the impact of UAC and per-user registry
virtualization.
Another is the impact of SysWOW registry redirection on 64-bit
systems.
You will understand that proper installation packages are more important than ever before. Windows has many auto-remediations for legacy software but some of them will not result in applications having all of the originally intended behaviors. Most of them will only be applied when your application "follows the right path" from installation to second run.
Here we have a case that is intended to be handled through use of a proper Windows Installer package, or at least a legacy setup recognized as such through Windows' "legacy installer detection heuristics." In general legacy scripted setups are deprecated but as long as they stay on the path Windows makes efforts to ensure they succeed.
Manually deploying by just copying over a bunch of files and randomly running regsvr32 on some of them has a reduced chance of success. This was never an approved method of deployment anyway.
You have most likely run afoul of some combination of registry virtualization and redirection.
The regsvr32 utility is a development tool, not a deployment tool. If you insist on trying to use it for deployment you must follow the same rules a developer must follow:
Run the correct version. On a 64-bit system there are both 64- and
32-bit versions of this utility. The 32-bit version which you must
use is located in the SysWOW64 folder.
Run it from an elevated command prompt. An easy
way to start one is to type <Winkey>cmd.exe<Ctrl-Shift-Enter> then
approve the UAC prompt or provide over-the-shoulder admin credentials
as needed.
There are many other things you need to know and handle in order to be successful. If you have ignored those most of them will only become apparent to you after your program gets installed and will run. A lot of them stem from filesystem virtualization.
I have a puzzling situation with the Inno Setup FileExists function.
Here's the situation. I have three networked computers with like WORKGROUP names.
1) Windows 7 32-bit
2) Windows 7 64-bit
3) Window XP Service Pack 3
1) and 3) have been setup as servers with read-write shares, ex. ShareExe and ShareData
The problematic Inno Setup creates shortcuts to the executable in the ShareExe folder. It asks the user for the ComputerName of the server and then uses FileExists to verify correct input.
Running this setup on the XP (3) machine and specifying 1)'s computername works just fine, however when running the setup on the Win7 64-bit PC and specifying the same ComputerName as with XP, causes the FileExtsts test to fail.
Strangely, I can go to Network Places and open the ShareExe folder and successfully run the executable. My question is, "why does Inno FileExists fail only on the Win 7 64-bit machine?" I cannot find anything in the reference materials that suggest any version differences with FileExists. (I also tried FileSearch with the same results).
TIA
In Windows 7 (and Vista) with UAC enabled, by default network credentials and drive mappings are not shared between admin and non-admin contexts, even for the same user.
By default, Inno elevates to admin permissions (via PrivilegesRequired=admin), since most installations must (and should) be performed per-machine by an admin user. However this means that any credentials prompted for or saved by Explorer when browsing for the desktop are not available to it.
When files are accessed directly by APIs (as with FileExists), Windows will typically try to silently connect to the server using the same username/password as was used to log into the PC; if this fails then it just reports an error since it has no way to prompt for alternate credentials at that point. So if you can ensure that the login details on both PCs are the same, then it should work. (You usually get this for free on computers connected to a domain, but not a workgroup.)
If that isn't possible, then something else you could try would be to force the access via a shell dialog -- if the FileExists fails, then use GetOpenFileName to prompt the user to find a specific file in that folder, using the same initial path. I haven't tested this, but I think this should result in Windows displaying a credential prompt and then you should be ok after that.
(If this is for an internal app, then another option is to disable the separation of credentials [via a security policy setting] or UAC entirely, though the latter isn't really a good idea. Of course this isn't tolerable for a general-release app, and it's cleaner if you solve it one of the other ways anyway.)
I am running SignTool with the following command:
signtool sign /f keyfile.pfx /p mypassword pathToMsiFile.msi
and i get the following error:
SignTool Error: An unexpected internal error has occurred. Error
information: "Error: Store::ImportCertObject() failed."
(-2146893792/0x80090020)
It worked just until a day ago, and i have no idea what might have changed...
Any ideas would be great, thanks!
I managed to fix it.
Apperantly the user was corrupted.
after fixing the user using this KB from microsoft everything became right again.
I had the same issue but only when I'm trying to sign it under IIS/PHP script. When I run PHP from the console it's OK. And here there were no issue with account. Only one thing helped me - changing Anonymous Authentication Credentials for Site/application from Specific USER to Application pool identity.
I managed to fix it. Apperantly the user was corrupted.
after fixing the user using this KB from microsoft everything became right again.
None of the suggested answers worked for me using Windows 2008 R2 and IIS 7.5. What did work was to change a setting for the application pool. Here is what works on IIS 7.5.
Select your application pool and click Advanced Settings
Under Process Model, change Identity to LocalSystem
This is the only thing that worked for me, hopefully it will help others down the road.
I'm not sure if setting your Application Pool to run as the LocalSystem is a good idea from the security standpoint. One way to fix this error is to enable Load User Profile in Advanced settings for the Application Pool. Don't ask how long it took me to find it out...
Here's more details.
I was also experiencing this error within a web application which was using an IIS web application pool with domain credentials, but the "Load User Profile" was set to false. Once I set it to true, signtool.exe worked without issues.
I'm having a lot of problems trying to start an application as administrator on an application I'm writing when running it on XP Embedded.
The application runs as the shell for a limited user account and is touch-screen and keyboard-less with one user command being to run the touch screen vendor's calibration tool. This must be run as administrator.
No problem I thought, add user and password information to the ProcessStartInfo and all should be fine. No. The error I get is:
System.ComponentMode.Win32Exception: The specified service does not exist as an installed service.
From some investigation, I've found that:
My Process starting code is correct:
any application can be started successfully on XP Embedded when run as the limited user
any application can be run as Administrator on my own laptop
on XP Embedded, any application is regarded as being a service in the same way, including notepad
if I attempt to start a program from within process explorer, I simply get "Unable to execute process: Access is Denied"
I'm not an XP Embedded expert in anyways so I'd very much appreciate some help. I suspect that there's a configuration setting that has been set when building the XP image that specifically denies access to process creation and that the errors I'm being reported are actually mis-reports from software that's not assuming XP Embedded error codes.
Unfortunately, the people who make the base image aren't around right now so I can't get the current settings.
Thanks in advance if anyone's ever seen this before!
Kev
For the record, it turned out that the "Secondary Logon" service wasn't installed in the image.
The code I had reached down eventually into either CreateProcessWithLogonW or CreateProcessAsUser which ultimately depend on this service running. The "specified service" error was spot on, but not about what I thought it was about. No idea why I got that particular error from Process Explorer.