Detach debugger(unknown) from process? - debugging

I am trying to attach debugger(windbg,ollydbg) to running process but there's an error saying Debugger is already attached then how can i detach that unknown debugger from that process?
Process includes multi thread, one thread can be attached to debugger and other can't.

The process might be spawning a second process which attaches to the first process for debugging using DebugActiveProcess() in order to prevent people from debugging the first process. Keep in mind that a process cannot debug itself using this method, so a second process must be spawned to do this.
Things you could try:
Use any sort of process monitor or even task manager to figure out what process the first process spawns
Inject code into the second process to call DebugActiveProcessStop() to detach it from the first process
Hook DebugActiveProcess() (kernel32.DebugActiveProcess, ntdll.ZwDebugActiveProcess, or in kernelmode) and redirect it to attach to a different dummy process
Kill the second process
Prevent the second process from getting a handle to the first process with the needed permissions - DebugActiveProcess() will then fail
Use alternative debugging methods (Cheat engine with VEH debugging for example) that don't use the normal debugging API's and therefore bypass this problem

Related

Is there a way to get notification within your process when a remote process opened a process handle to your process from usermode

I am trying to figure out who killed my process from taskmanager. Since taskmanager uses TerminateProcess and to Terminate a process remotely, it opens a Process Handle first.
So I am trying to look for UserMode ways to get a notification when a remote process tries to open a handle to my process.
I am aware there are possible solutions for this from Kernel mode using Driver Callbacks etc. But currently I am looking for User Mode possible solutions
I am trying to figure out who killed my process.
There is no official way to do that.
I am trying to look for UserMode ways to get a notification when a remote process tries to open a handle to my process.
There is no such notification in user mode.
The only way I can think of doing this is to use SetWindowsHookEx() to globally inject a custom DLL into every running process, and then you can have that DLL manually hook OpenProcess() directly, such as with a detour.
The hook can then compare the function's dwProcessId parameter value against your app's current process ID, which you can store in a block of globally shared memory while your app is running, such as via CreateFileMapping()+MapViewOfFile() (see Sharing Files and Memory and Creating Named Shared Memory).

Why is WmiPrvSE.exe holding onto a handle to my Process' Job Object?

I have a .NET application which spawns multiple child 'worker processes'. I am using the Windows Job Object API and the JOB_OBJECT_LIMIT_KILL_ON_JOB_CLOSE setting to ensure the child processes always get killed if the parent process is terminated.
However, I have observed a number of orphaned processes still running on the machine after the parent has been closed. Using Process Explorer, I can see they are correctly still assigned to the Job, and that the Job has the correct 'Kill on Job Close' setting configured.
The documentation for JOB_OBJECT_LIMIT_KILL_ON_JOB_CLOSE states:
"Causes all processes associated with the job to terminate when the last handle to the job is closed."
This would seem to imply that a handle to the Job was still open somewhere... I did a search for handles to my Job object, and found instances of WmiPrvSE.exe in the results. If I kill the relevant WmiPrvSE.exe process, the outstanding handle to Job is apparently closed, and all the orphaned application processes get terminated as expected.
How come WmiPrvSE.exe has a handle to my Job?
You may find this blog in sorting out what WmiPrvSE is doing.
WmiPrvSE is the WMI Provider host. That means it hosts WMI providers, which are DLLs. So it's almost surely the case that WmiPrvSE doesn't have a handle to your job, but one of the providers it hosts does. In order to figure out which provider is the culprit, one way is to follow the process here and then see which of the separate processes holds the handle.
Once you have determined which provider is holding the handle you can either try to deduce, based on what system components the provider manages, what kind of query would have a handle to your Job. Or you can just disable the provider, if you don't care about losing access to the management of the components the provider provides.
If you can determine what kind of query would be holding a handle, you may be able to deduce what program is issuing the query. Or maybe the eventlog can tell you that (first link above).
To get more help please provide additional details in the OP, such as which providers are running in WmiPrvSE, any relevant eventlog events, and any other diagnostics info you obtain.
EDIT 1/27/16
An approach to find out what happened that caused WMIPrvSE to obtain your job's handle is to use Windbg's !htrace extension. You need to run !htrace -enable after you load you .EXE but before you execute it in Windbg. Then you can break in later and execute !htrace <handle> to see stack traces when the handle was manipulated. You may want to start with this article on handle implementation.

Managing the lifetime of a process I don't control

I'm using Chromium Embedded Framework 3 (via CEFGlue) to host a browser in a third-party process via a plugin. CEF spins up various external processes (e.g. the renderer process) and manages the lifetime of these.
When the third-party process exits cleanly, CefRuntime.Shutdown is called and all the processes exit cleanly. When the third-party process exits badly (for example it crashes) I'm left with CEF executables still running and this (sometimes) causes problems with the host application meaning it doesn't start again.
I'd like a way to ensure that whatever manner the host application exits CefRuntime.Shutdown is called and the user doesn't end up with spurious processes running.
I've been pointed in the direction of job objects (see here) but this seems like it might be difficult to ship in a real solution as on some versions of Windows it requires administrative rights.
I could also set CEF to run in single process mode, but the documentation specifies that this is really for "debugging" only, so I'm assuming shipping this in production code is bad for some reason (see here).
What other options do I have?
Following on from the comments, I've tried passing the PID of the host process through to the client (I can do this by overriding OnBeforeChildProcessLaunch). I've then created a simple watchdog with the following code:
ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(_ => {
var process = Process.GetProcessById(pid);
while (!process.WaitForExit(5000)) {
Console.WriteLine("Waiting for external process to die...");
}
Process.GetCurrentProcess().Kill();
});
I can verify in the debugger that this code executes and that the PID I'm passing into it is correct. However, if I terminate the host process I find that the thread simply dies in a way that I can't control and that the lines following the while loop are never executed (even if I replace it with a Console.WriteLine I never see any more messages printed from this thread.
For posterity, the solution suggested by #IInspectable worked, but in order to make it work I had to switch the implementation of of the external process to use the non-multi threaded message loop.
settings.MultiThreadedMessageLoop = false;
CefRuntime.Initialize(mainArgs, settings, cefWebApp, IntPtr.Zero);
Application.Idle += (sender,e) => {
if (parentProcess.HasExited) Process.GetCurrentProcess().Kill();
CefRuntime.DoMessageLoopWork();
}
Application.Run();

In Windows 7, how to send a Ctrl-C or Ctrl-Break to a separate process

Our group has long running processes which run daily. The processes are typically started at 9pm on any given day and run until 7pm the next day. Thus they typically run 22hrs/day. They are started by scheduled tasks on servers under a particular generic user ID, and they start and run regardless of whether or not that user ID is logged on. Thus, they are windowless console executables.
The tasks orchestrate computations running on a large server farm. Generally these controlling tasks run uninterrupted for the full 22hrs/day. However, we often have a need to stop and restart these processes. Because they control a multitude of tasks running on our server farm, it is important that they be shut down cleanly, so that they can stop and shut down all the server farm processes. Which brings me to our problem.
The controlling process has been programmed to respond to ctrl-C and ctrl-break signals. This works fine when the process is manually started in a console where we have access to the console and can "type" ctrl-c or ctrl-break in the console window. However, as mentioned, the processes typically run as windowless scheduled tasks. Hence we cannot "type" anything into a non-existent console window. Because they are console processes that execute without a logon process, the also must be able to execute in a completely windowless environment. So, how do we set up the process to listen for a shut-down signal?
While the process does indeed listen for a ctrl-C and ctrl-break signal, I can see no way to send that signal to a process. This seems to be a fundamental problem in Windows, or am I wrong? I am aware of SendSignal.exe, but so far have been unable to get it to work. It fails as follows:
>SendSignal 26320
Sending signal to process 26320...
CreateRemoteThread failed with 0x00000005.
StartRemoteThread failed with 0x00000005.
0x00000005 == Access is denied.
Trying "taskkill" without -F results in:
>taskkill /PID 24840
ERROR: The process with PID 24840 could not be terminated.
Reason: This process can only be terminated forcefully (with /F option).
All other "kill" functions kill the process immediately rather than sending a signal.
One possible solution would be a file-watch based solution: create a watch for some modification of a specific file. But this is a hack and we would prefer to do it with appropriate signaling. Has anyone solved this issue? It seems to be so very basic a functionality, and it is certainly trivial to do it in a Unix environment. Surely Microsoft has provided SOME mechanism to allow clean shut down of a windowless executable?
I am aware of the thread below, whose question is virtually identical (save for the specification of why the answer is necessary, i.e. why one needs to be able to do this for a windowless, console-less process), but there is no answer there excpet for "use SendSignal", which, as I said, does not work for us:
Can I send a ctrl-C (SIGINT) to an application on Windows?
There are other similar questions, but no answers as yet.
Any help appreciated.
[Upgrading #Anon's comment to an answer for visibility]
windows-kill worked perfectly and managed to resolve access denial issues faced with SendSignal. A privileged user would have to run it as well of course.
windows-kill also supports both ctrl-c and ctrl-break signals.

Can I handle the killing of my windows process through the Task Manager?

I have a windows C++ application (app.exe). When the app is closed, I need to perform some cleanup tasks specific to my application. What happens when this process (app.exe) is killed through the Task Manager. Assuming that the application is still responsive, can I somehow handle this situation in my app.exe?
I am looking for something similar to how kill <pid> in Linux will send the SIGTERM signal to the process indicated by pid. I could then register my own signal handler for SIGTERM and perform the cleanup.
There are two ways to kill application in Task Manager.
Killing through Applications tab would roughly be equivalent of SIGTERM. Application may intercept it and do more processing, since it's basically sending a "close window" message. Message to catch is WM_CLOSE.
Killing through Processes tab would roughly be equivalent of SIGKILL. There is nothing you can do to intercept that, short of monitoring user's actions in Task Manager's listbox and End Process button, or having a watchdog process that will see when the first one is killed.
Alternatively, design the application in a way that does not require cleanup, or in a way that it will perform cleanup at startup.
I think you will need another PID that is monitoring the PID of your app.exe and does the necessary work at the time.
That depends, if the user chooses to "End Task" your application you will be notified and you can handle it see this.
but if the user chooses to end the process, you have no way to handle it in your application. the easiest way would be a second process or you can inject into process manager and hook the TerminateProcess API.

Resources