|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Hooking Engine Deatmatch" |
|
|
|
|
|
description: "Evaluating various hooking engines, putting them against pathologically hard to hook functions" |
|
|
|
|
|
date: 2020-02-26T22:00:00+01:00 |
|
|
|
|
|
draft: false |
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the full code see the [git repo](https://vcs.wacked.codes/wacked/hook_tests). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Introduction |
|
|
|
|
|
============ |
|
|
|
|
|
This project aims to give a simple overview on how good various x64 hooking |
|
|
|
|
|
engines (on windows) are. I'll try to write various functions, that are hard to |
|
|
|
|
|
patch and then see how each hooking engine does. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'll test: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* [EasyHook](https://easyhook.github.io/) |
|
|
|
|
|
* [PolyHook](https://github.com/stevemk14ebr/PolyHook) |
|
|
|
|
|
* [MinHook](https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/44326/MinHook-The-Minimalistic-x-x-API-Hooking-Libra) |
|
|
|
|
|
* [Mhook](http://codefromthe70s.org/mhook24.aspx) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(I'd like to test detours, but I'm not willing to pay for it. So that isn't |
|
|
|
|
|
tested :( ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are multiple things that make hooking difficult. Maybe you want to patch |
|
|
|
|
|
while the application is running -- in that case you might get race conditions, |
|
|
|
|
|
as the application is executing your half finished hook. Maybe the software has |
|
|
|
|
|
some self protection features (or other software on the system provides that, |
|
|
|
|
|
e.g. Trustee Rapport) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evaluating how the hooking engines stack up against that is not the goal here. |
|
|
|
|
|
Neither are non-functional criteria, like how fast it is or how much memory it |
|
|
|
|
|
needs for each hook. This is just about the challenges the function to be |
|
|
|
|
|
hooked itself poses. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Namely: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Are jumps relocated? |
|
|
|
|
|
* What about RIP adressing? |
|
|
|
|
|
* If there's a loop at the beginning / if it's a tail recurisve function, does |
|
|
|
|
|
the hooking engine handle it? |
|
|
|
|
|
* How good is the dissassembler, how many instructions does it know? |
|
|
|
|
|
* Can it hook already hooked functions? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At first I will give a short walk through of the architecture, then quickly go |
|
|
|
|
|
over the test cases. After that come the results and an evaluation for each |
|
|
|
|
|
engine. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think I found a flaw in all of them; I'll publish a small POC which should at |
|
|
|
|
|
least detect the existence of problematic code. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**A word of caution**: my results are worse than expected, so do assume I have |
|
|
|
|
|
made a mistake in using the libraries. I went into this expecting that some |
|
|
|
|
|
engines at least would try to detect e.g. the loops back into the first few |
|
|
|
|
|
bytes. But none did? That's gotta be wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**Another word of caution**: parts of this are rushed and/or ugly. Please |
|
|
|
|
|
double check parts that seem suspicious. And I'd love to get patches, even for |
|
|
|
|
|
the most trivial things -- spelling mistakes? Yes please. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Result |
|
|
|
|
|
======== |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Name|Small|Branch|RIP Relative|AVX|RDRAND|Loop|TailRec| |
|
|
|
|
|
|----------|-----|------|------------|---|------|----|-------| |
|
|
|
|
|
| PolyHook| X | X | X | X | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
| MinHook| X | X | X | | | | X | |
|
|
|
|
|
| MHook| | | X | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|