Hi Dario,
At the moment there is an option to limit access by client IP address, the default being 127.0.0.1. I agree regarding TLS and probably a shared
secret. Disabled by default would be fine. Removable at compile time – I’m not sure how practical that is but I don’t have a problem with the idea.
Limiting the functions available via the interface would address your other concerns.
It’s true that I have a very specific reason for building this feature ( see
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAyPyKaxDlY ) but I think if it were available it would spark ideas in others.
I still need to check out Jakub’s sharkd. It doesn’t do what I need at this time. I just need to assess if it could be made to do it.
Best regards…Paul
From: wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Dario Lombardo
Sent: 07 January 2017 17:09
To: Developer support list for Wireshark <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Remote Control Plugin - Can I submit to the Wireshark project
Is the remote control protected in some way? If not, it would open a new set of exploitations in wireshark. With this feature unprotected, not only is an attacker able to send arbitrary data into the network, but they're also able to control
wireshark as they were the user. I'm really concerned about this feature. While its use in a specific use case, like, maybe, Paul's one, to make it generally available could pose users open to attacks or at least to unwanted remote control.
AFAICS to be generally acceptable such a feature should be
- removable at compile time
- authorized (eg. by a password)
- channel protected (to avoid the reverse engineering of the communication protocol, eg through SSL/TLS).
Remember that many users have private, not-routed networks where they capture packets, but others capture in open networks.
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:34 PM, Paul Offord <Paul.Offord@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
Some time ago I wrote a Wireshark plugin (called Syncro) that enables a program to send commands to Wireshark. The
command set is based on the capabilities provided by the Wireshark Plugin IF API (go to frame, apply filter, etc.).
The commands are sent to Wireshark via a TCP connection, and so there is a small TCP service running on a separate
thread in Wireshark. The TCP service, multi-threading and thread-to-thread communications are built on Qt. Note the email trail below, where Roland suggests that it might not be necessary to use Qt.
I’d like to submit this to the Wireshark project as I think it could form the basis for a general capability of controlling
Wireshark from a loosely coupled application. Is this code suitable for submission to the project?
Thanks and regards…Paul
From:
wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Roland Knall
Sent: 05 August 2016 11:57
To: Developer support list for Wireshark <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Adding Qt5 libs via VS Additional Dependencies
This is exactly what I do here with my plugin. Although without the TCP part. The method to do it without using Qt in the dissector is to implement a tap interface in the dissector,
and register the plugin on that interface. The plugin than can start the TCP server and monitors the tap interface and reacts accordingly to the commands. Would work fine for you, the same way you do it now, but would be far easier to maintain. The dissector
would be stable and does never need to change, and all you would have to recompile is the plugin.
On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Paul Offord <Paul.Offord@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Roland,
No, not really an RPC interface. Some very simple commands and events flow back and forth, like this:
Command|GoToFrame|55
Response|MovedToFrame|55
Event|MovedToFrame|67
We needed it to be a dissector to enable us to detect when the user moves within a trace so that we
can generate a suitable asynchronous event. We also needed the functionality now, and it had to work with standard WS releases, so it had to be a plugin of some sort. By the way, we are not planning to submit this to be incorporated into the main stream
code.
You can see Syncro in action here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anEZGfF4P10&t=5m5s if you are interested.
Best regards…Paul
From:
wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Roland Knall
Sent: 05 August 2016 11:10
To: Developer support list for Wireshark <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Adding Qt5 libs via VS Additional Dependencies
So, if I understand it correctly, it is a RPC interface? I still think, implementing this as a dissector is a major overkill, and will also lead to issues further down the line,
if dissectory API changes or similar issues. I'd implement such an interface via a simple plugin architecture, which would have the added benefit, that you do not have the need for an active dissection runnning, to query the instance. A dissection should be
mainly about "How to interpret packet data", which is not the case here.
On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Paul Offord <Paul.Offord@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Roland,
The dissector is called Syncro and it allows a remote process to access the WS plugin_if extensions
through a TCP connection. We wanted to be able to achieve this without building a custom version of WS and so built it as a dissector. We don’t use any of the GUI stuff from Qt, just the TCP server functionality, multi-threading functions and Signals & Slots
to communicate between threads.
Best regards…Paul
______________________________________________________________________
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received
this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system.
Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Advance Seven Ltd. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed,
arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission.
Advance Seven Ltd. Registered in England & Wales numbered 2373877 at Endeavour House, Coopers End Lane, Stansted, Essex CM24 1SJ
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit
http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:
https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
______________________________________________________________________
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system.
Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Advance Seven Ltd. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission.
Advance Seven Ltd. Registered in England & Wales numbered 2373877 at Endeavour House, Coopers End Lane, Stansted, Essex CM24 1SJ
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________
|