Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | Re: priviledge escalation techniques |
|---|---|
| Date: | Wed, 19 Jan 2005 17:37:11 -0700 (MST) |
Hi again jnf!
Hello again Miguel
a) It's perfectly possible for a process to run with high privileges, and drop the privileges when in the need to do something else. In fact is not only possible, it's common practice, both in the *nix and Windows world.
Agreed, but if its not needed, why do it? I think the kernel intercepting the keys and then kicking the program when necessary is a much better idea from a design standpoint, imho of course.
I blame the fact that WHEN NO ONE IS LOGGED IN, the system is still monitoring the 5 SHIFT sequence, and runs sethc.exe as SYSTEM in that case (you can even launch explorer.exe and have the whole enchilada as SYSTEM). I'm not saying that I'm surprised, considering that the guys at M$ have thrown everything but the kitchen sink into system space...
Well it makes sense though, consider that disabled people have to login as well and if they sit down, they may not be sure what state the computer is in- however a much better idea at this point is to have an equiv of 'nobody' to have it run as when its run. So in that respect, I don't think having it intercept the keys before a login is made is bad, however i will agree doing so as system is generally a bad idea, however if we are to assume that the program is totally secure (hypothetically), then it really becomes a moot point as you have to bypass other security mechanisms in order to take advantage of this. I imagine if you were to ask MS about this, you would probably get a simple answer (if you got one)
b) It's perfectly possible to monitor keystrokes even without administrative privileges, thanks to the way Windows is built. Feel free to try the keylogging functionality of the spanish tool VeoVeo (www.hackindex.org) as a normal user. If you don't understand spanish, don't panic, I made a translation to english, available at http://usuarios.lycos.es/n3kr0m4nc3r/tools/ I know VeoVeo it's not perfect, but it shows the idea, and the source is available if you are not happy with it.
I will relent here because I am not really a windows programmer, and know only the most basic of windows programming (I did something with routes once). I would say here this is bad design, however my base point was working around the least privlidge idea, that the program didn't need to intercept all the keys. And yes, I speak spanish, however no I don't have any windows machines- I will take your word on it, and relent on the subject as I didn't realize you did not need priv's past a regular user account.
I hope you don't think that the above are also silly statements...
I was in an odd mood that day, take nothing I said personal.
Cheers, Miguel Dilaj (Nekromancer, the humorous one)
jnf
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Symbol Keyguard wifi, Ng Security |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Recent Linux vulnerabilities, Michael Richardson |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: priviledge escalation techniques, miguel . dilaj |
| Next by Thread: | RE: priviledge escalation techniques, Marc Maiffret |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |