Monday, 25 June 2012

O2 Platform AppScan Standard Plugin (first version)

Using AppScan Standard SDK here is a simple Plug-in that adds O2 Platform's Log Viewer and C# REPL environment to this AppScan menu.

New page on 'Real-Time Vulnerability Feedback in VisualStudio'

If you read this blog online you will notice that there is a new page at the top called Real-Time Vulnerability Feedback in VisualStudio which consolidates the latest info and PoCs on this topic.

I think I might have hit a nerve with this PoC/Concept, since there has definitely been a spike in the traffic and interrest in the O2 Platform.

My strategy for O2 has always been to keep developing, improving and creating PoCs with what it can do. It is up to the community to pick it up and organically use it (or not).

Although this means that O2 usage and market penetration is slower, it also means that its progress is much more solid and scalable (i.e. O2 is a much better product today that it was 1 year ago)

So let's see what happens next, the PoC of providing Real Time Vulnerability Feedback inside an IDE is showing what the development environment should be like, and hopefully there will be enough momentum created by developers, clients and tool vendors to make this a reality :)

I'm doing my bit .... (... to change the way software is developed and make it more secure...)


Any real-world Fortify RTA case studies out there?

One of the replies I got for my Dynamically patching ASP.NET code in real-time? (Why don't WAF vendors do it?)  post, was the question "is this something similar to HP RTA?" (see HP Fortify Real-Time Analyzer (RTA) and RTA Customization: The power of being inside the application )

The answer is Yes(ish).

RTA (which they call Real-Time Analysis), would fit into the 'In memory, on app that has been instrumented and allows dynamic function hooking' mode.

My understanding (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is that RTA works by inserting stubs in code (just like AOP) that gives you hooks into method calls.

So yes RTA will allow 'Dynamic Patches' to be created, but it requires applications to be set-up like that (which you would also get in .NET if you started the process under the Profiller).

One of the key concepts that I think should exist with the concept of 'Dynamic Patches' is that it should be a 'patch' i.e. it should be something that can be dynamically enabled and disabled.

That said, I've always been a fan of the RTA concept since it goes on the right path of allowing apps to be patched for security vulnerabilities.

So ... now that this product has been out for a while (5+ years?), are there any real-world case studies of RTA working?

Also, how much of a commercial success is RTA? Are customers actually buying it?

If there is a market, what are the competitors?

Sunday, 24 June 2012

Dynamically patching ASP.NET code in real-time? (Why don't WAF vendors do it?)

I was asked today "...Do you think it's feasible to dynamically patch code in real-time? Think agent on a host instead of a waf. Think real patches instead of virtual ones..." and my short answer is:

Yes it is! (if you looking for the technical details, skip to the middle of the post)

I have done that several times in the past, for example in Sharepoint where I wrote a PoC that applied a 'real-time' C# patch (without touching the disk) into a live/running instance of MOSS.

So if it is possible, "...why are all the WAF vendors still trying to operate on the data stream? There is so much more you could so by hooking the runtime...".

There are a number of reasons why the WAF vendors don't want to get into this world:

  1. The WAF vendors (just like the SAST ones) are still trying to ignore the Applications they are supposed to protect. By that I mean that their model is based in protecting ALL types of Apps, and not a Specific Application. Which means that they are not very good at trying to understand how an Application actually works. For example they want to ignore the need to consume:
    • an Spring/Structs configuration file 
    • an static analysis of an ASP.NET MVC application,
    • the directory listing of all Aspx pages
    • the current HttpModules mappings/behaviour
    • etc...
  2. The WAF vendors are still selling an 'infrastructure security' product vs an 'application security' product.
  3. Very few (if any) WAF vendor has an effective way for it to 'talk' with an Application and issue/receive commands (for example via an agent)
  4. Dynamically patching is hard to do and requires a lot of customisation and Unit-Testing environments (see below)
  5. The WAFs vendors don't believe that there is a market for this type of capabilities, so they are not investing on it (every time I ask them for this, I get the answer: "Its only you (Dinis) that wants this"). Of course that it is hard for a client to buy something that doesn't exists, but (just like in the SAST world) the clients are also to blame here since they should be putting pressure on the WAF vendors to do this.
Before I continue, I want to say that I am a BIG fan of WAFs and I think they provide a lot of value on the Virtual Patching world. I'm not really covering DAST+WAF on this post, but that is also a great workflow, and if you are into that world , you have to take a look at Ryan Barnett's amazing work with ModSecurity: See Dynamic DAST/WAF Integration: Realtime Virtual Patching and OWASP ModSecurity Core Rule Set Project 

Now from a client point of view, would it make sense to do Dynamic Patching and be able to fix vulnerabilities/bugs in a very selective, low touch and focused way!


And the security guys, who usually have tantrums at the idea of doing dynamic patching (or WAF rules), are the ones not responsible for real-world applications with lots of moving parts, separate development teams and heavy deployment models (and even for the guys who have very nice and slick CI environments, I would argue that there are tons of cases where it will make a lot of sense to start a security fix process with a real-time patch).

I have done this before (live patching) using some pretty cool O2 Platform Foo, and what I found what that the dynamics of the 'conversation' between security guy and development team, were completely changed.

Here is the scenario, "...there is a security vulnerability in an application where it is possible to invoke from the GUI a feature inside a web control that is vulnerable to command injection..."

Without changing the code (which was not available since this was from a 3rd party component), the options were:
  • a) remove the control from the website (not acceptable solution from the business point of view)
  • b) detect the use of that control (on WAF or HttpModule) and redirect the user to a error page , since the vulnerability was in the main control's GUI, this was as good as option a) 
  • c) try to detect the code in transit and modify it - which was kinda doable, but made really hard by the sheer amount of webpage code, the dynamic nature of Javascript code used to build the control and the fact that this would need to be done on page rendering and page submission (there were a couple other factors with the HTML code created that made this really difficult).

BUT, when we added the capability to do a real-time .NET patch (where we can 'modify' any method on any class), this is what happened:
  • Suddenly, as the guy providing the advise, I started thinking about:
    • what is the 'best place in the code' to put the patch?
    • should I do input or output encoding/validation? (since its a case-by-case answer)
    • what are the side-effects of my patch?
    • how can I make the user experience as good as possible (where there are no GUI side effects)?
    • how to correctly/safely handle the cases where the dangerous functions (to be fixed) are used in a completely OK way by internal code?
  • If you look at the questions I was asking myself, I was starting to think 'as a developer' (remember that we usually just tell them what is wrong, or to use API XYZ to fix it)
  • As I wrote my patch, I found the need to have a set of unit-tests that covered the scenarios I was trying to fix. Because without them, how could I show the difference between 'This is an exploitable issue' vs 'Here is the app with the same user experience but without the exploitable scenario'
  • Once I had my Patch+UnitTests and gave them to the developers, the first thing they did was to do QA testing on the app running with the patched code (which surprised me the first time it happened, although it's pretty obvious in hindsight). 
    • Why did they do this? Well because they could! Suddenly, the security dude was basically saying "Hey here is a version of your site that 'should' behave like the previous version, but has a number of security fixes on it" . Naturally the first thing the developers wanted to do was to confirm that the app 'still behaved' like the original (non patched version)
    • And when they were happy that the proposed fixes had no side effect on the real app, they started to re-code my 'patch' in such a way that the behaviour of their new code and my 'dll injected' patch was the same (using the provided UnitTests to confirm it)

So technically speaking how can we 'dynamically patch' an ASP.NET application?

Let's say that we wanted to do what this guy asks for in this StackOverflow question: Programmatic MSIL injection 

Well, it depends where we are and how much control we have over the app's deployment:
  • In memory app, post JIT: This is the worse case scenario since the code we want to change has already been compiled/Jitted and already lives as unmanaged code:
    • Hook a debugger and automatically: breakpoint on the method, call patch, continue execution (this works quite well and unless the original app is very performance intensive, you would be surprised at its effectiveness). What is cool about this hook technique is that we can write the patch in C#
    • Hook the method via C++/Detours type injection - If the patch can be written in C++/Assembly this process is easier, if you want to write the patch in C# the process is much more complex
  • In memory app, pre JIT: If we can get our code to run before the code to fix has been Jitted (which might mean that you need to disable Native Image precompilation) you can do an In-Memory MSIL patch which:
    • is smaller than the original code: easier since you can do it via a simple memory copy (i.e. replace the original IL bytes with the 'patched' bytes)
    • is larger than the original code: harder since you will need to jump/call another method (ala detours)
  • In memory, on app that has been instrumented and allows dynamic function hooking: easy, but it's not very common to find an app set-up like this
  • In memory, on app that is running with the .NET profiler enabled: easy, but this has even worse performance implications than running with the debugger (and has the side effect that the app NEEDS to start under the profiller, where we can hook and detach a debugger into a live process)
  • Before load, without access to source code (not signed code): If you have access to the dlls you want to patch, and can modify them:
    • Use AOP like PostSharp:  This is a great way to do this since you get a LOT of plumbing provided by the the AOP framework (specially the method cross-cutting capabilities)
    • Direct MSIL patch on disk: Of which the Mono Cecil libraries are amazing
    • ILDASM decompile, patch IL,  ILASM compile: This should work, unless the original dll creator did unusual IL compilation or manipulation (like Microsoft with some of their core assemblies)
    • ILSPY decompile into C#, patch C# code,  Compile with VS: This depends a lot on the original code, and by now things tend to get quite messy
  • Before load, with access to source code  (not signed code): There are a number of options available here, of which the one I find more interesting is to use a Roslyn type refactoring to create the 'hook' functions that contain the patch (note that techniques like AOP are much easier to do with the code)
  • Before load, with signed code: Now if you want to modify an assembly which has been signed and used by other assemblies (who were compiled against the original signed assembly, not the patched one), one technique I've used in the past was to patch the CLR directly (i.e. the actually engine) to disable Strong Name Verification (it's actually a 2 byte patch: ret true; ). Note that by now (v4.0 of the .Net framework), there are probably better ways to load these 'patched' assemblies into memory that have the wrong strong name
I'm sure there other ways / techniques that could be used (like trying to do in memory Mocking and AOP), but the ones above are the ones I have used successfully :)

Note that I was using the O2 Platform when creating the PoCs described here :) (in fact there are a number of  current O2 modules and capabilities that were created during these engagements)

I will strongly advise anybody trying to do this, to use O2's REPL Scripting, or have a similar REPL environment. Since you will go crazy if you have to compile and press F5 every time you want to run your code/script/patch :)

Good books which actually focus on security code reviews (on .NET)

I was asked this question today via Twitter, so here are the books I would recommend for .NET developers looking to learn more about Application Security and do Code Reviews:

In SAST the issue is 'Trace Connection', not 'Scan Size'

One of the 'wrong problem to be solving' paradox that happens in the SAST world is the focus on making their engines able to 'scan large code bases'. It is not a coincidence that the key question I got from SAST engine guys on the Real-time Vulnerability Creation Feedback inside VisualStudio (with Greens and Reds) was 'Humm.... interresting but will is scale to large applications?' 

I actually blame the SAST clients for this, since they are the ones asking (and paying for) the wrong question:

 "How can you 'vendor xyz' scan my million lines of code application"

Instead they should be asking:

 "When you scan my code, can you connect the traces?"

'Connecting the traces' means that you are able to scan parts of the application separately and then connect them at a later stage.

O2 .NET SAST Engine: MethodStream and CodeStrams for a WebService Method

One of the hidden Gems of the O2 Platform is its SAST engine that is able to create what its called MethodSteams and CodeSteams (from C# code).

MethodSteams are a code representation of an entire call-tree, i.e. one file that contains the original method and all the methods it calls (recursively).

CodeSteams are all the possible 'taint follow' paths that exist on a particular MethodSteam

Here are they in action in the HacmeBank's source code:

Thursday, 21 June 2012

This is how we have to show security vulnerabilities to developers (in real time as they are created)

I posted a PoC today that represents my vision for O2 and what I have been trying to do for the past 5 years.

You can see the video at Real-time Vulnerability Creation Feedback inside VisualStudio (with Greens and Reds) where every time the user makes a change to the code there is an auto-compilation (using Roslyn's C# compiler) and a SAST scan (using Cat.NET)

What I like the most about this, is that I now get to think about 'the best workflow to present developers the security guidance they need'.

Although this PoC is quite agressive (I do a compilation and scan on every keystoke which is a bit OTT), here is another video that shows a bigger compilation+scan on save: Real-Time C# Solution Compilation and Security Scanning (using Roslyn and Cat.NET) 

What do you think?

Real-time Vulnerability Creation Feedback inside VisualStudio (with Greens and Reds)

Here is a pretty cool PoC of a Real-time Vulnerability Creation Feedback inside VisualStudio where I show how a number of security vulnerabilities (XSS, SQL Injection, Path Transversal, Unvalidated Redirects) are detected as soon as they are created.

I'm trying to find out the best visual way to present this info to the user, and Greens/Red are usually a good indication of good/bad stuff (also note how the squiggly lines show the traces (i.e. the places where there is a vulnerability)

If you want to comment on this PoC or idea, please use this reddit thread 

Related posts:

Tuesday, 19 June 2012

Roslyn NerdDinner compilation errors (on June 2012)

Using the Util - Roslyn - Compile Solution and view errors.h2 O2 Platform Script/GUI, I was able to quickly try to compile the latest version of NerdDinner (just drag and drop the NerdDinner.sln file: 

As you can see by the screenshot above, there are the current errors, some of which are a bit weird.

Here are all the errors in an easier way to consume:

Real-Time C# Solution Compilation and Security Scanning (using Roslyn and Cat.NET)

On the Real time Vulnerability Scanning using Cat.Net and Roslyn (SAST) example, the compilation and scanning happened on a single file, which was cool, but not that realistic.

The next step was to be able to compile and scan an VS Solution file (*.sln), like one from the 'vulnerable by design' SuperSecureBank site.

In the video below, I use Roslyn's project loading and monitoring capabilities to trigger a compilation every time there is a change made to a solution file. And if the compilation is ok, a security scan (using Cat.NET) is triggered (both steps done in a couple seconds):

Running Cat.NET SAST Scanner outside VisualStudio

One of the big limitations of Cat.NET was its need to be executed inside VisualStudio.

Yes VisualStudio is one of the places where we want to use Cat.NET's engine and GUIs, but it is also very important to be able to run it as a stand-alone tool (and to inject it into other .NET applications).

Here is a video that shows a GUI/script I created with the O2 Platfrom, which shows the execution of Cat.NET GUIs + Scanning engine outside VisualStudio, and a couple extra features added.

REPL C# Editor to edit another REPL C# Editor ( i.e. 'Script the Script')

Here is a practical C# example of what can be done with the Type Confusion capabilities added to the O2 Platform.

What is happening in this GUI is that the REPL script on the right is given as a parameter (via the script variable) the REPL gui on the left (which is of type ascx_Simple_Script_Editor);

The problem is that the ascx_Simple_Script_Editor object comes from a dynamically compiled dll (with ascx_Simple_Script_Editor.cs) and the object from the left cannot be casted into the same type on the right.

The solution is to do a Type Confusion cast, which has no direct side effects since the objects are the same.

Here is the code that builds this GUI:

Here is the code that is running on the right-hand-side REPL environment:

To see a practical example of this ideas, next time you are inside an O2 C# REPL Editor, go to the context menu and chose the menu item: Utils -> Script this Script

C# Type Confusion - tricking the compiler to view a String as a StringBuilder (or a TextBox as a Label)

One of the less known security implications of the fact that the .NET verifier is disabled when executing code in FullTrust (which is the default) is the fact that the type-safety of the code executed is mainly enforced by the compiler and not (as expected) by the CLR (which is the case when the verifier is enabler).

'Type Confusion' happens when we are are able to cast an Class A object into a Class B type,  without triggering an compilation or runtime error. Under normal behaviour, we would get an compilation error since Class A and Class B are not compatible classes.

We are basically trying to do this (which breaks 'type safety'):

String a = "";
StringBuilder b = (StringBuilder) a;

Here is a C# code sample that shows a number of examples around an specific Type Confusion scenario:

Extension method used:

Code that creates the DLL which does the type confusion:

Here is a different example where I was able to cast an TextBox as a Label:

Although we can can cast any object into any type, if the memory values don't align, we will end up crashing the runtime :)

For example, casting a TextBox as a ToolStripTextBox

Triggered this error:

And this one:

So yeah, we have to be careful, but I already have a number of places I can use this technique inside the O2 Platform (for example when reusing dynamically compiled objects which from the CLR point of view are created in different assemblies, and are treated as incompatible)

Related Posts:

Monday, 18 June 2012

Using the System.Windows.Forms.Form ClientSize property to fix its different sizes on different windows 7 themes

Here is a really annoying C#/Windows GUI behaviour created by the fact that current Windows 7 theme affects the height of a control (namely is main Panel).

Using O2, here is a script that creates a simple form:

The idea is that this should create a popup window with a Form with width of 400 and height of 40 and a panel inside it that always have the same size  (ie the width and height values of the inner panel should be consistent across multiple versions of Windows).

But that doesn't happen

This is what originally happened in Windows XP (or Windows 7 when we have the 'Windows Classic' Theme):

And this is what happens when we use the Windows 7 Basic theme (note the difference in size of the inner panel).

If you don't think that this is a problem, look at the differences between these two O2 GUIs (which is the script Util- Stop all (but current) O2_XRules_Database processes.h2)


The solution is to use the ClientSize property to ensure that we have the right size

Which will give us a consistent  panel size on both Windows Themes:


This fix has been added to the latest version of O2 Platform (with some O2 GUIs showing in a slightly bigger window, but at least the size of the main panel is consistent across windows themes)

There is also a new extension method that allows the easy modification of a Form's ClientSide value (in a thread safe way):

example of using this extension method:

C# GUI to View Processes Open Handles (Files, RegKeys, etc...) just like SysInternal's ProcessExplorer

How many times have you tried to find which file was open in one of your currently open processes?

One of the few reasons I use SysInternals ProcessExplorer is to use it 'Find Handle' capabilities, which allows me to find the processes that are locking a particular file.

I always wanted to do this from C# (and O2), and this weekend, based on the code from the StackOverflow's what process lock a file answer, I was able to build an O2 script that collects information about all open handles in the processes the current user has access to (you will need admin privs to look at all running processes)

You can see the scripts created here, and below is a video that shows the Tool - View Open Handles for all Processes.h2 in action (note the ability to quickly search on all open file handles)

Note 1: this script was written in C# using a couple Win32 DLLImport methods and can be executed by non-admins on userland (somehow I was under the impression that this type of handle information was only available: a) via the kernel, or b) if we hook all processes and got the handle data from via 'dll injection-code-execution')
Note 2: If it hangs while getting the process' handles, sometimes it helps to kill the process (for example TGitCache.exe) that is causing trouble (see the last entry on the LogViewer)  There is also quite a lot of memory allocs going on in the conversion of unmanaged data into C# objects, so this script will leak a lot of memory (i.e. you will not be able to use that process for a long time :) )

Wednesday, 13 June 2012

Removing an Event from a WinForm ListView control using reflection

The objective was to remove an event from a WinForm control that we don't have the source code for (and can't recompile and remove the event on directly on the source code).

This problem happened originally when dynamicaly consuming Cat.NET's guis (outside VisualStudio) and there were a couple controls (like a ListView) that hooked event handlers that triggered functions that had DTE dependencies (which triggered an exception since we were running Cat.NET outside visualstudio (and the DTE2 object was null).

There doesn't seem to be an easy way to do this (and google didn't find a good solution) so using O2's powerful reflection APIs I was able to find a solution which is now available as these extensionmethods:

Here is a document that shows how these extension methods were created:

Monday, 11 June 2012

Using Roslyn - Refactoring AddingMethodToClass (while creating an API)

Here is a step-by-step refactoring activity where I used of the Roslyn example methods (the AddingMethodToClass which shows how to "replace a class inside a namespace") and rewrote it using O2's Roslyn APIs (adding a bunch of Extension methods on the way) 

This is what the refactored code looks like:

This is what the original code looks like:

This is a smaller version of the refactored code:

Here is a document that shows how the refactored code was created:

1 line to compile, create and execute: O2 Script to use Roslyn to Dynamically compile and execute a method

Using the code sample from Loading an assembly generated by the Roslyn compiler here is how to write it using O2's Roslyn API.

Version 3 (doing it all in 1 line : ) )

Version 1 (replicating the original script with some error detection):

Code Samples

Version 1:

Version 2 (simpler with no error handling):

Version 3 (in one line):

Sunday, 10 June 2012

Simple O2 script to show Roslyn's Ast Error detection capabilities

Here is an simple O2 script that shows Roslyn's C# AST parsing capabilities in action, including how to show squiggly lines in the source code on the locations of those errors.

Note how fast the whole process is, and how Roslyn is able to handle broken C# files (my plan is to use this inside O2's REPL environment in order to give much better error messages when the AST is broken)


O2 Script:gist

Saturday, 9 June 2012

New Reddit Community for Cat.Net

I just created a new Cat.Net community (discussion forum) at Reddit.

You can access it at and if you are interested in this topic, please subscribe to it :)

To seed this community, I added my recent Cat.Net-related posts. and here is what it looks like:

For reference, here is the current introduction text (to be rewriten once there is more activity on this Reddit community)

"Since Microsoft stopped supporting its static analysis engine there is no place to talk and discuss about this engine and what can be done with it.

There is a lot of Cat.Net related activity happening (for example at the OWASP O2 Platform project), so the objective of this Community is to capture and enhance it"

I am a recent Redit user, but the more I used it the more I like it

 ... starting to think of creating a Reddi't community for the O2 Platform... :)

Using/Consuming Cat.Net's engine inside the O2 Platform (and outside VisualStudio)

A key component of the Real time Vulnerability Scanning using Cat.Net and Roslyn (SAST) PoC is the 'Real Time' part :)

The only way to achieve that type scanning speeds was to find a way to directly consume (i.e. access) Cat.Net scanning engine directly (i.e. in-process), instead of the command line (this will also be critical when we try to scan large projects, which will need to sliced, partially scanned and have its results glued/merged).

The document below shows how I did that and the evolution of the scripts.

Note that by these techniques, we have access to the entire Cat.Net scanning engine and can easily control its rules and execution workflow :)

In addition to the sheer fast-prototyping/development speed that we get with O2's REPL Scripting environment, one the key advantages of doing this type of development on top of the O2 Platform is the number of Static-Analysis-focused tools/APIs that already exists. For example note how I was able to easy consume/transform the Cat.Net findings into O2Findings (which can then be consumed/manipulated by the multiple O2Finding's viewers and tools)


Using Roslyn to Load and (quickly) Compile C# Solution files (outside VisualStudio)

Now that we can use Roslyn to compile (and create assemblies) in real-time the next step is to use it to open up and consume C# Solution files (something that I've always wanted to do properly without needing to use VisualStudio or deal with the xml format used by the *.sln files).

Friday, 8 June 2012

Weird Roslyn.Utilities.SerializableDataStorage casting issue when using new version

While writing a couple Roslyn scripts I started having a weird problem when consuming the June 2012 CTP dlls.

I was having the exception:

Unable to cast transparent proxy to type 'Roslyn.Utilities.SerializableDataStorage'. Unable to cast transparent proxy to type 'Roslyn.Utilities.SerializableDataStorage'.

Wednesday, 6 June 2012

Video: Real time Vulnerability Scanning using Cat.Net and Roslyn (SAST)

Here is a pretty cool PoC of creating an environment for developers that helps them to know when they create a security vulnerability (in real time).

Monday, 4 June 2012

Video: Using O2's Roslyn-based C# REPL Script environment

Roslyn is a new Microsoft's C# compiler written in C# (with also a VB flavour)

It is actually quite a spectacular piece of technology and in a way there is a LOT of similarities between the REPL environment I created in the O2 Platform and the one Roslyn is trying to do. In fact I'm thinking of moving some of O2's scripting capabilities from the current SharpDevelop parser to this new Roslyn one since their object model seems to be MUCH more powerful (of course that I'm bias, but I think that the O2's REPL environment as a couple killer features missing in current version of Roslyn REPL, so let's create the best-of-both-worlds REPL environment :) )

I've started using Roslyn in O2, and the first thing to do was to create an REPL environment which you can see in action in this video.

I am documenting the 'scripts evolution' (as drafts), and here are two I just created:
I think there is HUGE potential with this technology, and one area that I'm specially interested in is doing Security-focused Static Analysis, with integration with TeamMentor and Cat.NET (see Video: Injecting TeamMentor into Cat.Net running inside VisualStudio )

You can get Roslyn from O2 (it will install the package from NuGet), but if you want to try the visual studio integration you need to get the Microsoft “Roslyn” October 2011 CTP

If you want to comment this post or video, please use this reddit thread

Some Roslyn References and articles:

Saturday, 2 June 2012

Light Table gets 300k in funding

Congratulations to the Light Table guys, they just got 300k in funding via Kickstarter.

As I mentioned in  Light Table - Amazing PoC of IDE I really think it is a great idea and I wish the them best of luck.

Some comments:

  • This shows that it is possible to gather funding for software development projects (I did tried a half-baked attempt in 2010 which didn't really go anywhere: New funding model for O2's Development)
  • It shows that there is a lot of desire for better IDEs since the main ones we have (VisualStudio and Eclipse) are really showing off their age (and size)
  • It is a great way to build a community and get a list of interested parties. I would say that the current list of backers (all 7317 of them) is as valuable (if not more) as the 300k raised
  • Although there is an OpenSource element of it, they also have a commercial license, which might have helped with the pledges since there is something tangible given in return (notice the different types of pledges)
  • The money is going directly to the developers (from the community) which could be a good model for OWASP since it would be compabible with the concept of Why OWASP can't pay OWASP Leaders 

Big Security challenges with creating APIs for US Gov agencies

So Barack Obama Directs All Federal Agencies to Have an API 

Here is the White house memo (pdf) which mandates the implementation of  "Digital Government: Building a 21st Century Platform to Better Serve the American People" (pdf).

The good news it that at least security and privacy seems to be taken into account (with it's own chapter and focus)

I haven't read the document but after a skim, it looks like there is more focus on the non-secure-application-development 'security side' of these APIs.

And this could be an issue, since creating APIs is usually done by exposing internal systems or WebServices, which will now need to have much higher level of security than before (when they were connected to much less hostile environment).

I also like the use/focus on Privacy, since that will be a good way to drive coding and application changes.

This is a great opportunity for OWASP community to be involved since there is going to be a lot of API developers out there that could do with some help

Friday, 1 June 2012

Video: Injecting C# DLLs into Managed (C#) and Unmanaged (C++) processes

I was finally able to inject O2's REPL scripting environment into other processes (both managed and unmanaged)

Originally I was just trying to inject a managed dll into another .NET process, but the 4.0 .NET Framework will load up a CLR when it is not there, so this technique will also work on unmanaged (i.e. C++ based) applications.

Here is what happens in the video below:
  • Inside O2,  run the Util - Inject O2 into other processes.h2 script (which will provide a nice 'Injection GUI')
    • on the left there is a TreeView with a list of all current processes that have MainWindowHandle != 0 (a requirement at the moment)
    • on the right there is a TreeView with a list of the loaded modules (i.e. dlls) from the selected process
    • if you right-click on the process list you will be able: 
      • bring the process window to front, 
      • refresh the process list and 
      • do the injection into the selected process
  • Open LinqPad using the link from the 'Actions Panel' (on the top)
    • After LinqPad opens, select it on the process list and click on the 'Inject O2 into Process' link (top left)
    • An O2 REPL environment will apear. A number of scripts are dynamically created, showing that we now have complete control over the LinqPad GUI, by for example:
      • injecting a new Tab with another O2 REPL Editor
      • making the entire GUI pink or azure :)
  • Close LinqPad and back in the Util - Inject O2 into other processes.h2 click on the 'Open Calc' link to open Calc.exe (an unmanaged windows app (i.e. no CLR))
    • After Calc opens, select it on the process list and click on the 'Inject O2 into Process' link (top left)
    • A come more scripts are written to show that we are indeed inside the Calc.exe process.
This open up a LOT of interesting integration possibilities, and it is a much more solid solution that the use used before which required O2 dlls to be copied into the target's application folder (see Injecting O2 into IBM Rational AppScan Standard and Creating a Pink version of IBM Rational AppScan Standard)

Related Posts:

ConsolR Compilify and Roslyn

ConsolR is a really nice web-based C# execution environment, here is their description:

ConsolR enables you to execute C# code againt a running .NET 4.0 web application's app domain through a browser. Once installed, ConsolR will automatically configure itself during application start and is accessible through the "/consolr" path. This enables an interactive console session against for instance an application's production environment.

ConsolR is based on the Compilify project which provides the base REPL environment

Compilify uses the Microsoft's Roslyn engine which looks like a very powerful C# code analysis and manipulation (in fact from this Roslyn document I get the feel that I should rewrite O2's REPL Script environment using it)

Note: to install the VisualStudio I had to upgrade to the latest version of NuGet (which in VS 2011 SP1 can only be done after installing this HotFix)

Here it is in action:

Humm.... I wonder how much work it would be to convert this into an web version of O2 REPL environment :)