Community
    • Login

    DLL Hack in Notepad++

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
    44 Posts 13 Posters 56.3k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • dailD
      dail
      last edited by

      just one function call which needs to be passed through to get the same privilege as the main process?

      That would assume you bypassed the Windows OS and got into the process space of Notepad++, which by then you have other issues ;)

      Maybe a blog worth reading…

      Will look at it tomorrow when I have a bit more time.

      The safest solution would just be link the SciLexer statically instead of loading it dynamically but I’m not saying this is the right solution

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
      • donhoD
        donho
        last edited by

        @dail

        The safest solution would just be link the SciLexer statically instead of loading it dynamically but I’m not saying this is the right solution

        Yes, you’re right. it’ll be in the roadmap. In the meantime, I will do the quick fix - checking the scilexer.dll before loading it.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
        • donhoD
          donho
          last edited by donho

          This headline is misleading. The DLL exists for CIA assets to use the cover app while it’s executing other code under the hood. From my reading, it’s not meant to be used against the person using notepad++, it’s to let them use notepad++ without raising any red flags while the DLL does data collection in the background. Those apps listed are the cover apps that look normal, the DLL hijack is to make them malicious with the knowledge of the operator.

          ref: https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/5y0iqa/notepad_users_cia_has_had_a_dll_hijack_for_your/

          @dail @Claudia-Frank
          I agree that once users’ PC are compromised, the certificate checking is meaningless.
          However, it makes harder (more job) to hack by checking certificate.
          Just like knowing the lock is useless for people who are willing to go into my house, I still shut the door and lock it every morning when I leave home.

          We are in a f**king corrupted world! Sigh

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
          • Alan KilbornA
            Alan Kilborn
            last edited by

            I’m trying to get my head around this. No, not the part about the vulnerability, I understand that; the part I don’t understand is why all of a sudden this is like some big revelation…

            Claudia FrankC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • Claudia FrankC
              Claudia Frank @Alan Kilborn
              last edited by

              @Alan-Kilborn
              Don’t know if I understand you correctly. I guess Don and dail are very well aware about
              the issue but when such a hack gets public it needs to be addressed. Don’t know
              if you ever where in the position to explain to your IT Security department that such a hack
              can’t be avoided as long as the operating system doesn’t ensure a safe environment.
              They simply ignore it - as long as you don’t provide “a” solution it is marked a vulnerable and
              you don’t get the permission to use this software anymore.
              Notepad++ is used in companies - at least in the ones that I was working for.

              Cheers
              Claudia

              Alan KilbornA 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
              • Alan KilbornA
                Alan Kilborn @Claudia Frank
                last edited by

                @Claudia-Frank

                Ah, okay Claudia, I think you understood my question and I understand your response. Thank you. Over my long period of observation, Windows seems inherently unsecure, probably because it is backing its way into security rather than having it be a major part of the design criterion. Sad.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • young-developerY
                  young-developer
                  last edited by young-developer

                  I think there is no sens in checking certificates or staff like that because project is open source and everybody could create their own version of npp.

                  P.S. If someone is paranoid then could simply check md5 hash of original files(dlls and so on) :D

                  Alan KilbornA Claudia FrankC 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • Alan KilbornA
                    Alan Kilborn @young-developer
                    last edited by

                    @young-developer

                    Yes, well, in this case you’d have to check the MD5 on the SciLexer.dll that will be loaded, which is perhaps a different one than the one that you think will get loaded. :)

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • Claudia FrankC
                      Claudia Frank @young-developer
                      last edited by Claudia Frank

                      @young-developer

                      I think there is no sens in checking certificates or staff like that because project is open source and everybody could create their own version of npp.

                      Not if the private key is kept private ;-) (so it is open source with parts being not open)
                      NO ;-) I don’t want to start a new discussion whether this makes sense. :-)

                      If someone is paranoid then could simply check md5 hash of original files(dlls and so on)

                      Nope, md5 is considered insecure.

                      But all in all you are correct and Don, dail etc… do also agree once users’ PC are compromised …

                      Cheers
                      Claudia

                      young-developerY 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • young-developerY
                        young-developer @Claudia Frank
                        last edited by

                        @Claudia-Frank ,
                        SHA-2 (SHA-256) or SHA-3 could be checked as well, just to be certain everything is ok and sleep calmly at night ahhaha :D

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                        • Mikhail ShilovM
                          Mikhail Shilov
                          last edited by

                          Exploit Notepad++ (SciTE) ;-)

                          dailD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • dailD
                            dail @Mikhail Shilov
                            last edited by

                            @Mikhail-Shilov

                            I still don’t understand what makes this unique to Notepad++/SciTE/Scintilla. You could do the same thing to any dll file.

                            Mikhail ShilovM 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • Mikhail ShilovM
                              Mikhail Shilov @dail
                              last edited by

                              There is nothing unique here. I could do the same thing with any dll file. Just you were unlucky to turn up in Wikileaks. :)

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                              • gstaviG
                                gstavi
                                last edited by

                                Signatures are a problem for people who want to build NPP by themselves and modify it.
                                They can’t sign DLL by themselves so they will need to go into NPP code and also disable the signature check.
                                Given that the added security is very very minimal I don’t think that NPP should test the signature of SciLexer.DLL.
                                Once an attacker has access to the file system to replace DLLs, specifically to ‘Program Files’ which usually requires administrator privileges the system is doomed anyway.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • chcgC
                                  chcg
                                  last edited by

                                  Collisions on linking with a static build of scilexer.lib:

                                  1>SciLexer.lib(PlatWin.obj) : error LNK2005: “public: virtual __cdecl Window::~Window(void)” (??1Window@@UEAA@XZ) ist bereits in fileBrowser.obj definiert.
                                  1>SciLexer.lib(UniConversion.obj) : error LNK2005: “unsigned int __cdecl UTF8Length(wchar_t const *,unsigned int)” (?UTF8Length@@YAIPEB_WI@Z) ist bereits in UniConversion.obj definiert.
                                  1>SciLexer.lib(Style.obj) : error LNK2005: “public: __cdecl Style::Style(void)” (??0Style@@QEAA@XZ) ist bereits in Notepad_plus.obj definiert.
                                  1>SciLexer.lib(Style.obj) : error LNK2005: “public: __cdecl Style::~Style(void)” (??1Style@@QEAA@XZ) ist bereits in FindReplaceDlg.obj definiert.

                                  See http://www.scintilla.org/ScintillaDoc.html#BuildingScintilla for builds with STATIC_BUILD.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • Cory BlankenshipC
                                    Cory Blankenship
                                    last edited by

                                    From what I’ve read in the Vault7 release, DLL injection is a great way to insert malicious code into the memory space where a legit DLL resides.

                                    I’m not terribly sure if this directly applies, but I found this post on StackOverflow on how to avoid DLL injection in Windows processes/applications:

                                    http://stackoverflow.com/questions/869320/how-do-i-prevent-dll-injection

                                    Honestly, I hadn’t heard of DLL injection prior to the Vault7 release, so the my comprehension of the matter is limited. I have to say that if I understand it correctly though, the concept is fascinating.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • Gilberto SCG
                                      Gilberto SC
                                      last edited by

                                      Is it possible to know if my scilexer.dll has been hijacked?

                                      mkupperM Claudia FrankC 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • mkupperM
                                        mkupper @Gilberto SC
                                        last edited by

                                        @Gilberto-SC said:

                                        Is it possible to know if my scilexer.dll has been hijacked?

                                        It depends on the hijack. The CIA, related organizations, and black-hat hackers, is adding spyware to computers and devices used by their targets. Among the things they do conceal that spyware is running is that are making changes to DLLs and/or intercepting calls to DLLs. Someone inspecting their process list will see nothing unusual. If they use Notepad++ they would see notepad++.exe running. If they close Notepad++ that process goes away.

                                        If the only change they made to the target’s computer is to replace DLLs with versions that include spyware then, yes, it’s possible to know if scilexer.dll has been hijacked. However, in order to replace scilexer.dll the attacker needed full administrative mode rights. If that’s the case they likely also installed a root kit and much more. If the target inspects scilexer.dll the bits and bytes they see will be exactly the same as the copy of scilexer.dll that comes with Notepad++ or similar products. The only way for a target to see if they have been hacked is to take the machine or device to a forensic lab and to have them tear it apart down to nearly the molecule level. Even with that they may miss the clues. See Stuxnet for an example of how attackers such as the CIA operate. The good news for the CIA is if the target hears about v7.3.3, installs it, that it’s going to pass the test. The target thinks they are safe (until they read this post) and the CIA continues to monitor the target. Once the CIA spots this post they may make arrangements so that the target sees something that leads them to believe they are safe. :-)

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • Claudia FrankC
                                          Claudia Frank @Gilberto SC
                                          last edited by

                                          @Gilberto-SC

                                          you can use procmon in order to find out which dll gets loaded, from where and when.
                                          Run procmon, define a filter for npp and then start npp.
                                          It needs a bit of training but if you are really interested in finding out what does what
                                          check out the sysinternals tools as well as everything Mark Russinovich has posted/blogged.

                                          Once you are at the level to understand how process, threads, libraries, drivers … work together
                                          download hxd and start investigating memory.

                                          Other useful tools can be found at nirsoft.

                                          Cheers
                                          Claudia

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          The Community of users of the Notepad++ text editor.
                                          Powered by NodeBB | Contributors