Open Zhentar opened 6 years ago
Cool!
For 1) and 2) I am not very familiar with dbgeng's memory searching... I'll have to read up on that. By far the best memory searching functionality I've seen were in a debugger extension called !pde
, but I'm not sure if that's available externally. I'll look into it.
For 3) Can grouping be done without accumulating? Yes, the grouping done by the alternate formatting engine in DbgShell operates on a streaming basis--it evaluates each item against the grouping criteria, and when it comes back different, it's a new group.
Here's where you can get PDE: https://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Defrag-Tools -> follow link to OneDrive for downloads. Here is the video about string searching.
The source is not available externally unfortunately.
Just had need of it and I am indeed rather impressed with the string searching. Don't suppose you could get me the public debug symbols for it, nearly as good as source 😉
Getting closer to what I want :)
>Search-DbgMemory 04244c8b | Read-DbgMemory -LengthInBytes 4
VirtualAlloc 75b10000 - 75d6c000 MEM_IMAGE combase
75b6ade4 04244c8b
VirtualAlloc 75f50000 - 760dd000 MEM_IMAGE user32
75f8df60 04244c8b
75f8e180 04244c8b
VirtualAlloc 76170000 - 7628e000 MEM_IMAGE ucrtbase
761b68e0 04244c8b
761b6ed0 04244c8b
761b6f40 04244c8b
(Hmmm, only just now occurred to me that "VirtualAlloc" is not a very good label for MEM_IMAGE/MEM_MAPPED regions...)
(BTW GroupByResultIsDifferent doesn't really work as intended; ==
on two object
references will only test reference equality. https://github.com/Zhentar/DbgShell/commit/f212ff00385005e8dcf909fdd16f950f8d275737 has a rewrite of it, including sequence comparison)
Now this is looking a lot like what my heart desires 😁
> Search-DbgMemory 010203a0 | Read-DbgMemory -LengthInBytes 4
VirtualAlloc 007f0000 - 008f0000 MEM_PRIVATE Heap 007f0000
Heap entry body 008242f0 size 0x2000 Busy
00825d60 010203a0
008ce458 010203a0
VirtualAlloc 06c70000 - 06d70000 MEM_PRIVATE Heap 007f0000
Heap entry body 06cc9340 size 0x690 Busy
06cc9348 010203a0
06cca1e8 010203a0
I was wondering how !PDE.spx
manages to be so much faster than SearchVirtual2
, so I took a look at how they work.
ReadVirtual
(filtering by virtual region attributes), casts to a pointer-size array, and indexes through that looking for matches.ReadVirtual
, searching for matching byte patterns and rejecting matches with inappropriate alignment.Hmmm, so my desire to "play nice" and use SearchVirtual2 led me to wrap it in a second layer of exactly the same weaknesses. Meanwhile, PDE.spx takes exactly the same approach my fuzzy-searching prototype used, and that prototype was both easier & more intuitive to use and more capable than my first Search-DbgMemory
attempt.
Which leads me to conclude that PDE achieves it's much better search experience because it rightly separates searching into two distinct tasks: aligned power-of-2 byte sized searches, and arbitrary size byte/character array searches. And also that using ReadVirtual to read page sized blocks and search them rather than using SearchVirtual2 is a totally reasonable and well performing approach.
So, my start on round 2:
> Search-DbgMemory 010203a0 -SearchMask 0xFFFFFF03
VirtualAlloc 007f0000 - 008f0000 MEM_PRIVATE Heap 007f0000
Heap entry body 008242f0 size 0x2000 Busy
00825d60 010203a0 ....
VirtualAlloc 52010000 - 5274e000 MEM_IMAGE System_Xml_ni
5235d714 0102036b k...
5269344c 01020390 ....
I've forked DbgShell and started putting together a basic memory search command (which hopefully I will be able to polish into a reasonable pull request before the ADHD decides otherwise for me). I wanted to share some thoughts and get some input.
I've forgone DbgEng's search granularity option so that I could implement search alignment independent of the search size, to allow things like searching for pointers to nearby addresses:
On the one hand, awesome!, you're not going to be doing that in WinDbg... on the other hand, that's not a very straightforward approach and byte granularity means you're search for pointers in a 256 byte region or 64kB region, no in between... any thoughts on a better way to do it?
I'm taking the search value as a
ulong
, which means it caps out at 8 bytes... supporting strings seems easy enough, but I've no idea how to tackle 9+ byte non-string patterns. Are there any existing commands I can crib from?My ultimate goal is to do something like this:
Is there a way I can do grouping without accumulating?