Closed Brassrat closed 6 years ago
When you ask for xml output (-f xml) the output is not valid xml because
This is not the goal of the program to have a valid full XML document. The goal of the -f xml option is to provide output that is comparable to windows event log viewer xml output. You can easily write a small program around the library or Python binding to accomplish this if you need to.
Wrt 'recovered' entries - the xml was just not valid e.g., missing end tag ()
Not sure what you mean.
Another question, in the xml i see the following (in vim):
%%1537^M %%1538^M %%1539^M %%7168^M %%7169^M %%7170^M %%7171^M %%7172^M %%7173^MWhy the extra carriage return? The characters can be removed so they really are there. Or is this what is in the evtx bXML? Some list separator syntax? I don¹t have a good C IDE environment to debug this; obviously i can simply remove all carriage returns but they only show up for the AccessMask data values.
TIA, -jay
As indicated this is to match the Windows event viewer output.
Or is this what is in the evtx bXML?
Yes
Thanks for writing this library, i think it will be very useful to me. A minor nit however regarding evtxexport. When you ask for xml output (-f xml) the output is not valid xml because
<Events>[<Event>]*</Events>
changes for 1 requires moving the call to evtxoutput_version_fprint after argument processing so the export_format is known: `if( evtxexport_export_handle->export_format == EXPORT_FORMAT_XML ) { fprintf(stdout, "<!-- \n"); }
if( evtxexport_export_handle->export_format == EXPORT_FORMAT_XML ) { fprintf(stdout, "\n-->\n"); }`
changes for 2: are just a couple of additional fprintf s in export_handle.c