I've got a third-party program that's making WMI queries to local WMI providers (so it's not using DCOM, so packet-sniffers are out). I'd like to find out what queries these are.
It's also on XP, so the new Vista WMI tracing infrastructure is out, as well, unfortunately.
Any pointers?
Have you tried setting the WMI logging level to Verbose using wmimgmt.msc? (More info on the MSDN Logging WMI Activity page)
You should then see the queries logged to the %windir%\system32\wbem\logs\wbemcore.log file.
-dave
I believe that WMI uses DCOM for communication, you can use WireShark to do a packet capture of the DCOM packets. I believe that the dissector in WireShark for DCOM is usable though it still might help to reference this article (old, but should still be pertinent).
This will not work for WMI queries to localhost so you'll need to make sure it's querying a remote computer.
If you do want to log local queries take a look at this MSDN article on logging WMI queries.
Related
I'm doing various OS management and querying tasks using WMI, but it allways take a long time for first WMI call(10 to 15s).
When I tried few tools from sysinternals I found that they are so much faster and I want to know how is this possible.
For instance how can PsList tool returns result in under 2 second and for wmi it takes at least 15 seconds. Much of this time is used for authentication and not actual work, and next wmi query for the same machine is much faster.
Is possible to see the source code of sysinternals utilites ? Do they use WMI or direct win32 api calls ?
WMI has a lot of overhead: authentication/authorizing access to WMI namespaces/DCOM/RPC. It is designed for easy and secure management, not for performance.
Suggested reading:
WMI: Improving your WMI application performance in fan-out scenario
How could a (Windows) desktop application be created to monitor the amount of time spent on a particular website?
My first idea was to play with the Host file to intercept requests, log, and proxy. This feels a bit clunky; and I suspect my program would look like malware.
I feel like there is a smarter way? Any ideas?
There is a tool similar to what you are looking for called K-9 Web Protection. It is more used for parents to monitor what their kids are up to when hooked up to the internet. I have installed this for my niece's computer with good results and praises as it blocks, content filter, restrict internet times. This may be OTT for your needs but worth a shot as you can see what sites were visited.
The other, is to use a dedicated firewall monitoring solution such as IPCOP which is a Linux based distribution with a sole purpose in providing a proxy, stateful packet inspection (SPI) firewall, Intrusion Detection System (IDS).
Hope this helps,
Best regards,
Tom.
You could do this by monitoring active connections via netstat, or if you need more advanced data you can install The Windows Packet Capture Library and get any data about network use, and inside your desktop app, find network traffic that relates to 'spending time' on a website (which might just be GET requests for you, but I don't know), and record various statistics as required.
Route the traffic through a scriptable proxy and change the browser settings to point to that proxy.
There are any advantages or disadvantages of using the WMI instead of Windows API to access to the information of the system? as speed, additional permissions, memory usage.
or depends on the WMI class and how the WMI implements the access to the information?
The main disadvantage of WMI is speed, it is slow to query data and if you are trying to use it during start up it can delay you starting as the WMI service takes a long time to come up.
However, WMI information is richer, as in you need to sometimes make several API calls to get the same amount, some information is a lot easier to get at and the filtering syntax can dramatically reduce the amount code you have to write.
If speed isn't a massive issue, I would always lean towards WMI.
Disadvantage: Speed
Advantage: Wraps the native API, so as API calls change, unless the WMI changed also you will (might) get the benefits. It will also save you some coding.
And richer data. Since programmers can write their own WMI providers, you can get data from third party software. That's what Microsoft is doing in their security center interface-getting data from third-party antivirus and firewall softwares.
Advantage of WMI: Can get info about remote machines as easily as current machine
And impersonation!
You may have your program run with a non-proviledged user, but access a remote machine by specifying credentials.
If it is for system scope
Advantage of WMI:
Do not need to implement additional driver efforts
Disadvantage of WMI:
Need BIOS to wrap code
it is only for Windows. there's no Linux inbox driver.
Right now, my application is using the c-ares asynchronous DNS resolver library on Windows below cURL, and I have users complaining that it behaves differently from other windows apps. One particular user said that "other applications are using the Microsoft DNS client" and experiences no problems.
cURL itself has an asynchronous DNS implementation that uses getaddrinfo() in a thread. My guess is that would be equivalent behavior to using the "DNS Client" and its host of functions (e.g. DnsQuery?)
So, dear Lazyweb, I ask if there is a tangible difference between the behavior of getaddrinfo() vs. using the actual Dns* APIs from the Win32 API.
Looking at the sources it seems ares actually implements the dns protocol for querying host names (and doesn't directly call getaddrinfo) - I'd expect that to miss out on things like WINS lookups, and god knows what other kind of stuff windows can do to look up names.
The easiest way to do DNS queries on Windows is to use DNSQuery (and derivated functions, utf8, wbytes, ansi). Unless you need asynchronous resolution, in this case I would recommend to keep using c-ares or other similar API.
I'm not sure about WINS or other windows specific resolution (not part of DNS specs) not being covered by c-ares. It would help if you can give us some examples, maybe we can get them implemented in c-ares as well.
My company is looking at implementing a new VPN solution, but require that the connection be maintained programatically by our software. The VPN solution consists of a background service that seems to manage the physical connection and a command line/GUI utilty that initiates the request to connect/disconnect. I am looking for a way to "spy" on the API calls between the front-end utilty and back-end service so that our software can make the same calls to the service. Are there any recommended software solutions or methods to do this?
Typically, communications between a front-end application and back-end service are done through some form of IPC (sockets, named pipes, etc.) or through custom messages sent through the Service Control Manager. You'll probably need to find out which method this solution uses, and work from there - though if it's encrypted communication over a socket, this could be difficult.
Like Harper Shelby said, it could be very difficult, but you may start with filemon, which can tell you when certain processes create or write to files, regmon, which can do the same for registry writes and reads, and wireshark to monitor the network traffic. This can get you some data, but even with the data, it may be too difficult to interpret in a manner that would allow you to make the same calls.
I don't understand why you want to replace the utility, instead of simply running the utility from your application.
Anyway, you can run "dumpbin /imports whatevertheutilitynameis.exe" to see the static list of API function names to which the utility is linked; this doesn't show the sequence in which they're called, nor the parameter values.
You can then use a system debugger (e.g. Winice or whatever its more modern equivalent might be) to set breakpoints on these API, so that you break into the debugger (and can then inspect parameter values) when the utility invokes these APIs.
You might be able to glean some information using tools such as Spy++ to look at Windows messages. Debugging/tracing tools (Windbg, or etc.) may allow you to see API calls that are in process. The Sysinternals tools can show you system information to some degree of detail of usage.
Although I would recommend against this for the most part -- is it possible to contact the solution provider and get documentation? One reason for that is fragility -- if a vendor is not expecting users to utilize that aspect of the interface, they are more likely to change it without notice.