From 9fd9e66340144fbe6e03e8dccaf79470b4c31361 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: wacked <a@bc.de>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 22:08:09 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] hooking engines

---
 content/projects/hookengs.md | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 71 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 content/projects/hookengs.md

diff --git a/content/projects/hookengs.md b/content/projects/hookengs.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0d8dd71
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/projects/hookengs.md
@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+---
+title: "Hooking Engine Deatmatch"
+description: "Evaluating various hooking engines, putting them against pathologically hard to hook functions"
+date: 2020-02-26T22:00:00+01:00
+draft: false
+---
+
+For the full code see the [git repo](https://vcs.wacked.codes/wacked/hook_tests).
+
+Introduction
+============
+This project aims to give a simple overview on how good various x64 hooking
+engines (on windows) are. I'll try to write various functions, that are hard to
+patch and then see how each hooking engine does.
+
+I'll test:
+
+* [EasyHook](https://easyhook.github.io/)
+* [PolyHook](https://github.com/stevemk14ebr/PolyHook)
+* [MinHook](https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/44326/MinHook-The-Minimalistic-x-x-API-Hooking-Libra)
+* [Mhook](http://codefromthe70s.org/mhook24.aspx)
+
+(I'd like to test detours, but I'm not willing to pay for it. So that isn't
+tested :( )
+
+There are multiple things that make hooking difficult. Maybe you want to patch
+while the application is running -- in that case you might get race conditions,
+as the application is executing your half finished hook. Maybe the software has
+some self protection features (or other software on the system provides that,
+e.g. Trustee Rapport)
+
+Evaluating how the hooking engines stack up against that is not the goal here.
+Neither are non-functional criteria, like how fast it is or how much memory it
+needs for each hook. This is just about the challenges the function to be
+hooked itself poses.
+
+Namely:
+
+* Are jumps relocated?
+* What about RIP adressing?
+* If there's a loop at the beginning / if it's a tail recurisve function, does
+  the hooking engine handle it?
+* How good is the dissassembler, how many instructions does it know?
+* Can it hook already hooked functions?
+
+At first I will give a short walk through of the architecture, then quickly go
+over the test cases. After that come the results and an evaluation for each
+engine.
+
+I think I found a flaw in all of them; I'll publish a small POC which should at
+least detect the existence of problematic code.
+
+**A word of caution**: my results are worse than expected, so do assume I have
+made a mistake in using the libraries. I went into this expecting that some
+engines at least would try to detect e.g. the loops back into the first few
+bytes. But none did? That's gotta be wrong.
+
+**Another word of caution**: parts of this are rushed and/or ugly. Please
+double check parts that seem suspicious. And I'd love to get patches, even for
+the most trivial things -- spelling mistakes? Yes please.
+
+
+Result
+========
+
+|      Name|Small|Branch|RIP Relative|AVX|RDRAND|Loop|TailRec|
+|----------|-----|------|------------|---|------|----|-------|
+|  PolyHook|  X  |   X  |      X     | X |      |    |       |
+|   MinHook|  X  |   X  |      X     |   |      |    |   X   |
+|     MHook|     |      |      X     |   |      |    |       |
+