On 22 July 2015 at 18:37, Guy Harris <g...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > > On Jul 22, 2015, at 9:37 AM, Graham Bloice <graham.blo...@trihedral.com> > wrote: > > > Most, if not all, will be running Wireshark unelevated, as this is a > basic tenet of Wireshark use. There are millions of lines of code in > Wireshark dissectors and they really shouldn't be given admin privs. > > Does anybody know whether there exists, in Windows: > > 1) an inter-process communications mechanism, either documented or > reverse-engineered *and* likely to remain intact and usable from release to > release and in future releases, over which a HANDLE can be passed; > > DuplicateHandle - https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms724251(v=vs.85).aspx
A HANDLE to what though, the handle types that can be duplicated with that call are limited? If it's a socket HANDLE, then WSADuplicateSocket ( https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms741565(v=vs.85).aspx) is used. This creates a structure that can be handed off to the target process by some IPC mechanism. The IPC Mechanisms supported by Windows are listed here: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa365574(v=vs.85).aspx, pipes are commonly used. I don't think there are issues with pipes between a non-elevated process and an elevated one, but I haven't personally tried that. 2) a mechanism by which a non-privileged process can request that a > subprocess be run with elevated privileges - presumably requiring either > user consent or something else to indicate trust - with such an IPC channel > established between the non-privileged process and the privileged process? > A way to elevate a subprocess is via a call to ShellExecuteEx() setting the lpVerb in the passed in SHELLEXECUTEINFO structure to "runas". See http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vistacompatteam/archive/2006/09/25/771232.aspx. This will invoke UAC if enabled (a it should be). > > UN*Xes that support libpcap generally have 1) in the form of UNIX-domain > sockets (or, in newer versions of OS X, Mach messages, over which those > newer versions of OS X support passing file descriptors), and probably have > 2) in the form of, if nothing else, sudo or some GUI equivalent. > > The idea here is to have libpcap - and WinPcap, if the answers to those > questions are both "yes" - invoke a *small* helper process to do what work > needs elevated privileges to open capture devices, turn on monitor mode, > change channels, etc., so that programs using those libraries do not > *themselves* require elevated privileges. > > If the answer for the first question is "no", then do we have some way to > run dumpcap with elevated privileges and have a pipe between it and > Wireshark/TShark? > That's what currently happens on Windows using a named pipe, without the elevation though. -- Graham Bloice
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
