PE 101 explanation of addresses to windows api calls - winapi

I am trying to build a program that will give more information about a file and possibly a disassembler. I looked at https://code.google.com/p/corkami/wiki/PE101 to get more information and after reading it a few times I am understanding most of it. the part I don't understand is the call addresses to windows api. for example how did he know that the instruction call [0x402070] was an api call to messagebox? I understand how to count the addresses to the strings and the 2 push commands to strings make sense, but not the dll part.
I guess what I am trying to say is I don't understand the part that says "imports structures"
(the part I drew a box around in yellow) If any one could please explain to me how 0x402068 points to exitProcess and 0x402070 points to MessageBoxA, this would really help me. thanks

Loader (a part of Windows OS) "patches up" the Import Address Table (IAT) before starting the sample program, that's when the real addresses of the library procedures appear in the memory locations 0x402068 and 0x402068. Please note that imports reside in section nobits in simple.asm:
section nobits vstart=IMAGEBASE + 2 * SECTIONALIGN align=FILEALIGN
The section with imports after load starts at virtual address (IMAGEBASE=400000h)+2*(SECTIONALIGN=1000h)=0x402000 .
The yasm source of the example is quite unusual and the diagram is also not the best place to learn PE format from. Please start by reading Wikipedia:Portable_Executable first (a short article). It has links to the full documents, so I will only make some short notes here.
You might also want to use the Cheat Engine to inspect the sample. Launch simple.exe, then attach to the process with Cheat Engine, press Memory View, then menu Tools->Dissect PE headers, then button Info, look at tab Imports. In the memory dump, go to address 00402000 (CTRL+G 00402000 Enter:
00402068: E4 39 BE 75 00 00 00 00 69 5F 47 77 00 00 00 00 6B 65 72 6E 65 6C 33 32 2E
Note the values at these locations
00402068: 0x75BE39E4 (on my computer) = the address of KERNEL32.ExitProcess
00402070: 0x77475F69 (in my case only) = the address of user32.MessageBoxA
Notice the text "kernel32.dll user32.dll" right after them. Now look at the hexdump of simple.exe (I would use Far Manager) and spot the same location before strings "kernel32.dll user32.dll". The values there are
0000000450: 69 74 50 72 6F 63 65 73 │ 73 00 00 00 4D 65 73 73 itProcess Mess
0000000460: 61 67 65 42 6F 78 41 00 │ 4C_20_00_00 00 00 00 00 ageBoxA L
0000000470: 5A_20_00_00 00 00 00 00 │ 6B 65 72 6E 65 6C 33 32 Z kernel32
0000000480: 2E 64 6C 6C 00 75 73 65 │ 72 33 32 2E 64 6C 6C 00 .dll user32.dll
0000000468: 0x0000204C — the Relative Virtual Address of dw 0;db 'ExitProcess', 0
0000000470: 0x0000205A — the Relative Virtual Address of dw 0;db 'MessageBoxA', 0
The loader has changed these values from what they were in the file after loading into memory. The Microsoft document pecoff.doc says about it:
6.4.4. Import Address Table
The structure and content of the Import Address Table are identical to that of the Import Lookup Table, until the file is bound. During binding, the entries in the Import Address Table are overwritten with the 32-bit (or 64-bit for PE32+) addresses of the symbols being imported: these addresses are the actual memory addresses of the symbols themselves (although technically, they are still called “virtual addresses”). The processing of binding is typically performed by the loader.

Related

How correct protect NXP NTAG215 for read/write

i've an big trouble with my NTAG215 tags.
I use this PDF below for reffer:
https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/data-sheet/NTAG213_215_216.pdf
COMMANDS
I send these raw commands:
AUTH TAG ( with default password )
nfc.transceive('1B FF FF FF FF')
CHANGE DEFAULT PASSWORD
nfc.transceive('A2 85 AA BB CC DD')
SET PACK
nfc.transceive('A2 86 EE FF 00 00')
PROTECT ADDRESS 04 TO 81
nfc.transceive('A2 83 04 00 00 04')
ENABLE READ/WRITE PROTECTION
nfc.transceive('A2 84 10 00 00 00')
After send these commands, i read my NTAG215, and confirm results, but...i can read all memory blocks without PWD ( 1B command ).
I need protect these memory blocks from read without correct password.
Thanks for all help guys.
Everything looks fine except for the last command.
ENABLE READ/WRITE PROTECTION
nfc.transceive('A2 84 10 00 00 00')
In order to enable the protection the command must be as follows:
nfc.transceive('A2 84 80 00 00 00')
So once a "session" is authenticated it stays authenticated until the session ends.
So if you connect with no/default/existing password, you then have to remove the Tag from the RF field so that the session ends.
The next time the Tag enters RF fields it will need authenticating again with the new password.

Not getting AFL for Visa Contactless Application?

I am not getting AFL in the GPO command for Visa contactless Application
GPO Request as Below:
Request :80 A8 00 00 12 83 10 B6 60 40 00 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 00 38 39 30 31 00
Tag 9F 66: Terminal Transaction Qualifiers : B6 60 40 00
Tag 9F 02: Transaction Amount : 00 00 00 01 00 00
Tag 5F 2A: Transaction Currency Code : 03 56
Tag 9F 37: Unpredictable Number : 38 39 30 31
Getting AFL is not mandatory. If you do not get AFL you are not expected to do any READs. You need not do some functions like ODA as you wont have data associated with it. You can proceed with the available data as such.
As per VISA specification (VCPS), AFL is not mandatory.
If it is not returned in GPO the kernel shall skip the READ RECORDS and proceeds to Card Read Complete.
Your Terminal Transaction Qualifier byte 1 bit 1 is set to zero, meaning "Offline Data Authentication for Online Authorizations not supported". Try setting it to 1: B6 60 40 00 --> B7 60 40 00.
I was having the same issue and this was enough to receive an AFL.
I am experimenting now with Visa contactless, Get Processing Options, PDOL, and Read Record commands.
Here is what I found:
Visa Contactless has data accessible via Read Record in either rec 1 or 2, in file 1. You do not need to issue GPO to get this data.
A more complicated case is Visa Contactless inside Google Pay.
Contrary to simple PDOL having 4 elements, this "card" application requests PDOL over 20 elements. I was not able to guess so far the proper values of all of them, to construct proper PDOL and get AFL in GPO APDU Response, and SW=0x90.
The application returns 0 bytes for each Read Record I tried, and so far I cannot find which record file contains application data.

win32 singleton with std containers CRT false memory leak? [duplicate]

It seems whenever there are static objects, _CrtDumpMemoryLeaks returns a false positive claiming it is leaking memory. I know this is because they do not get destroyed until after the main() (or WinMain) function. But is there any way of avoiding this? I use VS2008.
I found that if you tell it to check memory automatically after the program terminates, it allows all the static objects to be accounted for. I was using log4cxx and boost which do a lot of allocations in static blocks, this fixed my "false positives"...
Add the following line, instead of invoking _CrtDumpMemoryLeaks, somewhere in the beginning of main():
_CrtSetDbgFlag ( _CRTDBG_ALLOC_MEM_DF | _CRTDBG_LEAK_CHECK_DF );
For more details on usage and macros, refer to MSDN article:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/5at7yxcs(v=vs.71).aspx
Not a direct solution, but in general I've found it worthwhile to move as much allocation as possible out of static initialization time. It generally leads to headaches (initialization order, de-initialization order etc).
If that proves too difficult you can call _CrtMemCheckpoint (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/h3z85t43%28VS.80%29.aspx) at the start of main(), and _CrtMemDumpAllObjectsSince
at the end.
1) You said:
It seems whenever there are static objects, _CrtDumpMemoryLeaks returns a false positive claiming it is leaking memory.
I don't think this is correct. EDIT: Static objects are not created on heap. END EDIT: _CrtDumpMemoryLeaks only covers crt heap memory. Therefore these objects are not supposed to return false positives.
However, it is another thing if static variables are objects which themselves hold some heap memory (if for example they dynamically create member objects with operator new()).
2) Consider using _CRTDBG_LEAK_CHECK_DF in order to activate memory leak check at the end of program execution (this is described here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/d41t22sb(VS.80).aspx). I suppose then memory leak check is done even after termination of static variables.
Old question, but I have an answer. I am able to split the report in false positives and real memory leaks. In my main function, I initialize the memory debugging and generate a real memory leak at the really beginning of my application (never delete pcDynamicHeapStart):
int main()
{
_CrtSetDbgFlag( _CRTDBG_ALLOC_MEM_DF | _CRTDBG_LEAK_CHECK_DF );
char* pcDynamicHeapStart = new char[ 17u ];
strcpy_s( pcDynamicHeapStart, 17u, "DynamicHeapStart" );
...
After my application is finished, the report contains
Detected memory leaks!
Dumping objects ->
{15554} normal block at 0x00000000009CB7C0, 80 bytes long.
Data: < > DD DD DD DD DD DD DD DD DD DD DD DD DD DD DD DD
{14006} normal block at 0x00000000009CB360, 17 bytes long.
Data: <DynamicHeapStart> 44 79 6E 61 6D 69 63 48 65 61 70 53 74 61 72 74
{13998} normal block at 0x00000000009BF4B0, 32 bytes long.
Data: < ^ > E0 5E 9B 00 00 00 00 00 F0 7F 9C 00 00 00 00 00
{13997} normal block at 0x00000000009CA4B0, 8 bytes long.
Data: < > 14 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
{13982} normal block at 0x00000000009CB7C0, 16 bytes long.
Data: < # > D0 DD D6 40 01 00 00 00 90 08 9C 00 00 00 00 00
...
Object dump complete.
Now look at line "Data: <DynamicHeapStart> 44 79 6E 61 6D 69 63 48 65 61 70 53 74 61 72 74".
All reportet leaks below are false positives, all above are real leaks.
False positives don't mean there is no leak (it could be a static linked library which allocates heap at startup and never frees it), but you cannot eliminate the leak and that's no problem at all.
Since I invented this approach, I never had leaking applications any more.
I provide this here and hope this helps other developers to get stable applications.
Can you take a snapshot of the currently allocated objects every time you want a list? If so, you could remove the initially allocated objects from the list when you are looking for leaks that occur in operation. In the past, I have used this to find incremental leaks.
Another solution might be to sort the leaks and only consider duplicates for the same line of code. This should rule out static variable leaks.
Jacob
Ach. If you are sure that _CrtDumpMemoryLeaks() is lying, then you are probably correct. Most alleged memory leaks that I see are down to incorect calls to _CrtDumpMemoryLeaks(). I agree entirely with the following; _CrtDumpMemoryLeaks() dumps all open handles. But your program probably already has open handles, so be sure to call _CrtDumpMemoryLeaks() only when all handles have been released. See http://www.scottleckie.com/2010/08/_crtdumpmemoryleaks-and-related-fun/ for more info.
I can recommend Visual Leak Detector (it's free) rather than using the stuff built into VS. My problem was using _CrtDumpMemoryLeaks with an open source library that created 990 lines of output, all false positives so far as I can tell, as well as some things coming from boost. VLD ignored these and correctly reported some leaks I added for testing, including in a native DLL called from C#.

How can I create a byte signature for ClamAV?

I want to get a byte sequence out of the .text section of an object file and turn it into a signature. I want to execute ClamAV's clamscan with this signature to find other object files containing the same byte sequence.
With objdump the byte sequence looks like this:
A byte sequence for this example could look like this:
55 48 89 e5 48 83 ec 10 bf 0a 00 00 00 e8 ?? ?? ?? ?? 48 89 45 f8 c9 c3
the ?? being place holder.
I didn't find a way to do it with sigtool. Is there another tool for that, or do I have to do it manually and if so in which form do I have to save the signatures (format within the signature database and format of the database itself)?
I had to write a script which was doing this task by hand. I didn't find a way sigtool can do that for me. A script ran through the objdump and replaced the variable bytes. I stored the result in a database and with this database I could identify which library was linked statically using clamscan in binary mode (even if someone strips out the library names).

NFC Enabled SIM APDU Response 6A 82

I am working on NFC enabled SIM, using ISO-7816-4. While I try to SELECT MF, DF or EF, response is always 6A 82( File not found). Following are the APDUs
00 A4 00 00 02 3F 00 -> To SELECT MF
00 A4 00 00 02 2F E2 -> To SELECT EF
00 A4 00 00 02 7F 20 -> To SELECT DF
Response is always the same, i.e., 6A 82. Am I missing something here? Kindly help.
Your P2 is incorrect. However, I'm not sure why the card is returning status 6A 82 (File not found) instead of 6A 86 (Incorrect parameters to P1 to P2).
To select by FID (File Identifier), you need to set the P2 as follow:
P2=04. In case of successful SELECT, you will get status 61XX. Send GET RESPONSE and you will have the FCP Template in the response data.
P2=0C. In case of successful SELECT, no data returned. Only status 9000.
For more details of P1 and P2, refer to ETSI 102.221 section 11.1.1. You can download the file from this ETSI link.
The problem was not with APDUs, but with the value of SAK. SAK value was set to 0x28.
Which means NFC enabled SIM supports both;
CPU level APDUs (the one I was trying to communicate to) and
Mifare 1k sector (the one I should have tried to communicate to in the first place).
However CPU level APDUs had more priority than Mifare sector because of which my NFC reader/writer was unable to communicate to Mifare 1k sector. Once the value of SAK was changed to 0x08, it disabled CPU level APDUs and my NFC reader/writer was able to communicate with the Mifare 1k sector. Hope this helps.

Resources