Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add support for custom named pipe permissions #21

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

doronshemtov
Copy link

  • Allows to set custom permissions for the named pipes that are used for communicating with the monitoring DLL.

  • Creates a custom security descriptor using an SDDL string provided by an analysis option ("custom_pipe_sddl").

  • Main use case: monitored DLL is injected into a low-integrity process and doesn't have sufficient permissions to access a named pipe with default security descriptor.

Copy link

@yoniabrahamy yoniabrahamy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Just in general, what are the values we can deliver for custom_pipe_sddl?

@kevoreilly
Copy link

In which scenario(s) are processes being launched with low integrity?

@doronshemtov
Copy link
Author

@kevoreilly For example Firefox and other browsers are rendering content in a low-integrity child processes.
Unfortunately it is not always enough in order to monitor these browsers since they have additional sandboxing capabilities, but it should at least allow capemon to communicate if it was able to load into these processes.

@kevoreilly
Copy link

Ah right I see - a good reason. As you say monitoring modern browsers isn't trivial and I have spent a lot of time looking for api hook exclusions to try and get them working better in cape... ultimately to no avail. But I would definitely appreciate hearing how you get on in this area.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants