How do i get folder size rapidly?! - Windows Mobile Software Development

How do i get folder size rapidly?! - Windows Mobile Software Development

I write a C# app for WindowsMobile.
in order to get a nonrecursive folder size i have this routine:
Code:
static long GetDirectorySize(String path)
{
long size = 0;
String []files = Directory.GetFiles(path);
foreach (String f in files)
{
FileInfo fi = new FileInfo(f);
size += fi.Length;
}
return size;
}
now, my directory (in Storage Card) has about 1000 files that has about 4MB of data alltogether.
the GetDirectorySize takes forever to execute (60 seconds or so) and provide a horribole user expericnce.
executing this in a thread does not help either - i need the response as fast as possibole.
I was wondering if someone could help me figure out how to get folder size (nonrecursive) more rapidly.
in general, i also want to find the older file in the directory and delete it (kid of cache operation). how do i do that without waiting forever to complete?
storing an index file might not be what i'm looking for.
Thanks

I don't know about C#, but in C++ I use GetDiskFreeSpaceEx function, see HERE.
PS,
I think this goes in the Q&A forum?

dgaud007 said:
I use GetDiskFreeSpaceEx function
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This does not help with Folder size.
My intention is to manage Cache folder and monitor its size and clear out some cached files in case the cache size of the folder is too big.
getting the disk size is not the way to deal with folder size

You can use it for individual folders, as the folder name is the 1st input parameter. I've used at least for \My Documents which is a regular folder and it works. Here is an excerpt from MSDN:
lpDirectoryName [in, optional]
A directory on the disk.
If this parameter is NULL, the function uses the root of the current disk.
If this parameter is a UNC name, it must include a trailing backslash, for example, "\\MyServer\MyShare\".
This parameter does not have to specify the root directory on a disk. The function accepts any directory on a disk.
The calling application must have FILE_LIST_DIRECTORY access rights for this directory.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As per MSDN, here is how you implement it in C#:
Code:
[DllImport("kernel32.dll", CharSet=CharSet.Auto, SetLastError=true)]
internal static extern bool GetDiskFreeSpaceEx(string drive, out long freeBytesForUser, out long totalBytes, out long freeBytes);

I tested GetDiskFreeSpaceEx.
- The coredll has to be used instead kernel32dll (for WindowsMobile).
- the TotalBytes returns the SD card size (on which the folder exists)
- the freeBytesForUser equals FreeBytes and returns the free space in the SD card
this does return the folder size.
appreciate further help.
thanks

I double checked and you're right. Looks like you'll have to recurse while adding the individual sizes. I couldn't find an easier method in a brief search in google. Sorry about the confusion!
PS,
checkout this app...

I'm not that much of a C# expert but isn't the 1000 times calling "new" slowing down? I'd try to write a traditional C++ application using simple FindFirstFile and FindNextFile functions and compare speed towards the C# application. If it's faster then you can just build a C++ DLL and PInvoke her. I'm not sure if results are better but at least it's worth a try.

solution found
I managed to resolve this and get a speedy result by replacing with this code.
all the best.
Code:
private static long GetDirectorySize(String path)
{
long size = 0;
[COLOR="DarkGreen"] /* Slow code
String []files = Directory.GetFiles(path);
foreach (String f in files)
{
FileInfo fi = new FileInfo(f);
size += fi.Length;
} */[/COLOR]
DirectoryInfo di = new DirectoryInfo(path);
FileInfo []fi = di.GetFiles();
for (int i = 0; i < fi.Length; i++)
size += fi.Length;
return size;
}
btw: get my app at http://www.logelog.com/utils

Related

Cant modify module IAT to hook API

This may be better served in the development and hacking forum. Mods please move?
I am trying to hook the keybd_event API in the keypad. I have found the address of the import entry for keybd_event in the keypad.dll's IAT. I have done so by disassembling the keypad.dll and finding the offset from an exported function to that IAT entry. At runtime, I have added my own service (in order to get my dll loaded into services.exe). When loaded, I use GetModuleHandle and GetProcAddress to find that exported function then use the known offset to find the IAT entry. I have verified that I have the right memory location by comparing the pointer to the module's location using remote process viewer.
The problem is that I cannot read from or write to the IAT. My code crashes when I try. IsBadReadPtr and IsBadWritePtr tell me that I cant read or write to this memory location. Even a call to VirtualProtect to set it to PAGE_EXECUTE_READWRITE will not work. The call fails. How can I get access to this memory?
This simple test code exe shows that all the memory in the code section of keypad.dll is writeable. As soon as I hit section 2 which contains the IAT The call starts failing. Once I hit section 3 it succeeds again (the hard coded PID and address come from remote process viewer and my service dll; I debugged to find where the read calls fail).
Code:
int WINAPI WinMain(HINSTANCE hInstance, HINSTANCE hPrevInstance, LPTSTR lpCmdLine, int nCmdShow)
{
DWORD PID = 239927214, addr = 2061766572, read = 0, sz = 0;
HANDLE pr;
BOOL ans1;
_SetKMode SetKMode;
SetKMode = (_SetKMode)GetProcAddress(GetModuleHandle(L"coredll.dll"), L"SetKMode");
ans1 = SetKMode(true);
pr = OpenProcess(0, 0, PID);
while(ReadProcessMemory(pr, (LPVOID)addr, &read, 4, &sz))
addr++;
while(!ReadProcessMemory(pr, (LPVOID)addr, &read, 4, &sz))
addr++;
while(ReadProcessMemory(pr, (LPVOID)addr, &read, 4, &sz))
addr++;
//ans4 = WriteProcessMemory(pr, ptr2, &mkep, 4, &p4);
CloseHandle(pr);
return 0;
}
What do I need to do to get access? Calls to VirtualProtect and SetKMode do nothing. Any ideas? Thanks!

Nevermind! It seems I was not modifying the correct location. I was trying to modify the table that simply lists imports. I found where the actual function pointer is stored.

[Q] WP7 - Removing an XElement from an XML file

Hi there,
I'm having a big issue, when trying to remove an XElement from an XML file created in IsolatedStorage.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Code to CREATE the XML file
Dim File_to_Create As String = "Tracks.xml"
Dim file As XDocument = <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<dataroot xmlnsd="urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficedata" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="Cartridges.xsd" generated="2010-11-23T14:26:55">
<Carts>
<CART_NAME>First</CART_NAME>
<CART_COLOR>White</CART_COLOR>
</Carts>
<Carts>
<CART_NAME>Second</CART_NAME>
<CART_COLOR>Black</CART_COLOR>
</Carts>
</dataroot>
Dim isoStore As IsolatedStorageFile = IsolatedStorageFile.GetUserStoreForApplication()
Try
If isoStore.FileExists(File_to_Create) Then
MessageBox.Show(File_to_Create + " TRUE")
Else
MessageBox.Show(File_to_Create + " FALSE")
Dim oStream As New IsolatedStorageFileStream(File_to_Create, FileMode.Create, isoStore)
Dim writer As New StreamWriter(oStream)
writer.WriteLine(file)
writer.Close()
MessageBox.Show("OK")
End If
Catch ex As Exception
MessageBox.Show(ex.Message)
Finally
'open selected file
Dim isoStream As IsolatedStorageFileStream
isoStream = New IsolatedStorageFileStream(File_to_Create, System.IO.FileMode.Open, System.IO.FileAccess.Read, isoStore)
Dim XML_File As XDocument = XDocument.Load(isoStream)
Dim Cart_Query As System.Collections.IEnumerable = From query In XML_File.Descendants("Carts") Order By _
CStr(query.Element("CART_NAME")) Descending, CStr(query.Element("CART_NAME"))
Select New Class_Cartridge_Data With {.Cart_Name = CStr(query.Element("CART_NAME")), _
.Cart_Color = CStr(query.Element("CART_COLOR"))}
Me.ListBox_Cartridges.ItemsSource = Cart_Query
isoStore.Dispose()
isoStream.Close()
End Try
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Code to ADD / EDIT XElement
Dim File_to_Create As String = "Tracks.xml"
Dim XML_IsolatedStorage = IsolatedStorageFile.GetUserStoreForApplication()
' Check that the file exists if not create it
If Not (XML_IsolatedStorage.FileExists(File_to_Create)) Then
Return
End If
Dim XML_StreamReader As New StreamReader(XML_IsolatedStorage.OpenFile(File_to_Create, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Read))
Dim XML_Document As XDocument = XDocument.Parse(XML_StreamReader.ReadToEnd())
XML_StreamReader.Close()
' Update the element if it exist or create it if it doesn't
Dim XML_XElement As XElement = XML_Document.Descendants("Carts").Where(Function(c) c.Element("CART_NAME").Value.Equals("First")).FirstOrDefault()
If XML_XElement IsNot Nothing Then
XML_XElement.SetElementValue("CART_NAME", "Third")
Else
' Add new
Dim newProgress As New XElement("Cartridges", New XElement("CART_NAME", "Fourth"), New XElement("CART_COLOR", "Blue"))
Dim rootNode As XElement = XML_Document.Root
rootNode.Add(newProgress)
End If
Using XML_StreamWriter As New StreamWriter(XML_IsolatedStorage.OpenFile(File_to_Create, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Write))
XML_StreamWriter.Write(XML_Document.ToString())
XML_StreamWriter.Close()
End Using
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now my issue and request for some help!
If I use
XML_XElement.Remove
then the following exception is raised whenever I try to "refresh" the bounded ListBox
System.Xml.XmlException was unhandled
LineNumber=37
LinePosition=12
Message=Data at the root level is invalid. Line 37, position 12.
SourceUri=""
StackTrace:
at System.Xml.XmlTextReaderImpl.Throw(Exception e)
at System.Xml.XmlTextReaderImpl.Throw(Int32 res, String resString, String[] args)
at System.Xml.XmlTextReaderImpl.Throw(Int32 res, String resString)
at System.Xml.XmlTextReaderImpl.ParseRootLevelWhitespace()
at System.Xml.XmlTextReaderImpl.ParseDocumentContent()
at System.Xml.XmlTextReaderImpl.Read()
at System.Xml.Linq.XContainer.ReadContentFrom(XmlReader r)
at System.Xml.Linq.XContainer.ReadContentFrom(XmlReader r, LoadOptions o)
at System.Xml.Linq.XDocument.Load(XmlReader reader, LoadOptions options)
at System.Xml.Linq.XDocument.Load(Stream stream, LoadOptions options)
at System.Xml.Linq.XDocument.Load(Stream stream)
at ListBox_Data_from_XML_LINQ.MainPage.Button_Create_XML_Click(Object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
at System.Windows.Controls.Primitives.ButtonBase.OnClick()
at System.Windows.Controls.Button.OnClick()
at System.Windows.Controls.Primitives.ButtonBase.OnMouseLeftButtonUp(MouseButtonEventArgs e)
at System.Windows.Controls.Control.OnMouseLeftButtonUp(Control ctrl, EventArgs e)
at MS.Internal.JoltHelper.FireEvent(IntPtr unmanagedObj, IntPtr unmanagedObjArgs, Int32 argsTypeIndex, String eventName)
InnerException:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In short, I can add or edit, but cannot DELETE an XElement...
Any ideas?
Thanks in advance!

Can you post the code you are using for XElement.Remove and use code tags so the formatting is right. Its the # button on the post toolbar.

Ren13B said:
Can you post the code you are using for XElement.Remove and use code tags so the formatting is right. Its the # button on the post toolbar.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, I did nothing special, just the XML_Element.remove, instead of adding a new xelement.
Then the error raises whenever I try to reopen the XML file.
My point is, how can I delete an specific xelement?
As far as I know, the following code should work
Code:
Dim XML_XElement As XElement = XML_Document.Descendants("Carts").Where(Function(c ) c.Element("CART_NAME").Value.Equals("First")).Firs tOrDefault()
If XML_XElement IsNot Nothing Then
XML_XElement.SetElementValue("CART_NAME", "Third")
Else
' remove the selected record
XML_XElement.Remove
End If
Honestly I don't know if the foregoing code is correct or if the issue is related to how WP7 handles the removal thus corrupting the original file.
Please let me know if you need anything else.
Any help is very appreciated!
PS: Thanks for the other replies, helped a lot!

Here's how I did it in c#. My xml file is very different than yours so the query will be different but the important parts are where you load and close the file streams and then write.
Code:
//Get users private store info
IsolatedStorageFile isoStore = IsolatedStorageFile.GetUserStoreForApplication();
IsolatedStorageFileStream isoStream;
//open selected file
isoStream = new IsolatedStorageFileStream(list, System.IO.FileMode.Open, System.IO.FileAccess.Read, isoStore);
XDocument xml = XDocument.Load(isoStream);
isoStream.Close();
//Find section
XElement sectionElement = xml.Descendants("section").Where(c => c.Attribute("name").Value.Equals(groupn)).FirstOrDefault();
//Find item and remove it
sectionElement.Elements("setting").Where(c => c.Attribute("name").Value.Equals(litem)).FirstOrDefault().Remove();
isoStream.Close(); //Seems unnecessary but it's needed.
//Write xml file
isoStream = new IsolatedStorageFileStream(list, FileMode.Create, FileAccess.Write, isoStore);
xml.Save(isoStream);
isoStream.Close();

Thanks again for your help, greatly appreciated.
However I'm still getting the same error.
Sorry for asking, but are you getting any errors when deleting in WP7 ?
My knowledge on XML is extremely new and I'm sure that I'm making some mistakes somewhere...
But so far, I cannot get past the same exception.
Seems that the XML gots "corrupted" after the delete operation.
On the other hand, if is not too much to ask for, using my current code, how will handle the delete of the selected record?
Thanks!

I have no problem at all removing elements in c#. I don't have vb support even installed right now. If you think it's a bug you should post on the forums at http://forums.create.msdn.com/forums/98.aspx

Ren13B said:
I have no problem at all removing elements in c#. I don't have vb support even installed right now. If you think it's a bug you should post on the forums at http://forums.create.msdn.com/forums/98.aspx
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Problem is my country is not listed so I cannot register...
Here is the C# version of my current code for adding/editing
Code:
public static void ADD_XML_Record()
{
string File_to_Create = "Tracks.xml";
var XML_IsolatedStorage = IsolatedStorageFile.GetUserStoreForApplication();
// Check that the file exists if not create it
if (! (XML_IsolatedStorage.FileExists(File_to_Create)))
{
return;
}
StreamReader XML_StreamReader = new StreamReader(XML_IsolatedStorage.OpenFile(File_to_Create, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Read));
XDocument XML_Document = XDocument.Parse(XML_StreamReader.ReadToEnd());
XML_StreamReader.Close();
// Update the element if it exist or create it if it doesn't
XElement XML_XElement = XML_Document.Descendants("Carts").Where((c) => c.Element["CART_NAME"].Value.Equals("dd")).FirstOrDefault();
if (XML_XElement != null)
{
XML_XElement.SetElementValue("CART_NAME", "bbbbb");
}
else
{
// Add new
XElement newProgress = new XElement("Carts", new XElement("CART_NAME", "dd"), new XElement("CART_COLOR", "ff"));
XElement rootNode = XML_Document.Root;
rootNode.Add(newProgress);
}
using (StreamWriter XML_StreamWriter = new StreamWriter(XML_IsolatedStorage.OpenFile(File_to_Create, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Write)))
{
XML_StreamWriter.Write(XML_Document.ToString());
XML_StreamWriter.Close();
}
}
I tried your code but I'm having a bad time making it to work.
If not a big deal, please could you tell me how to modify it ?
I mean, if a record is found, instead of editing, to remove it?
Honestly I'm stuck and any help is more than apprecisted!

Ren13B said:
I have no problem at all removing elements in c#. I don't have vb support even installed right now. If you think it's a bug you should post on the forums at http://forums.create.msdn.com/forums/98.aspx
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ren,
Just to say thank you for your last code. I made a little mod and now it works ok!
Thanks a lot for helping me out!

Multiloader checksum check FFS

hi guys I'm doing some research on samsung's firmware files...
is there any good disassembler in here?
We need to know how is the checksum at the end of FFS // APP files calculated!
That's very important...
is there anyone who can help?

im sorry im not but maybe a frined of mine...
why is so important?
its hard to do?
if you give a link with a tutorial may be in some days i will be able to help...
i have programmed in c in the past...
cheers

I am a C programmer (university student) but we need disassemblers here, no programmers atm

Guys I don't know if you understand that the solution to this problem is CRUCIAL for the realization of custom firmwares!!
Trust me! Find some windows (desktop) disassembler as soon as possible!!
thanks

Type : Unofficial Version
Number : 41
Builder : HP05
Host : SCMHP05
Date : 2010/05/28
Time : 21:49:29
Size : 81790332 bytes
CheckSum : 0x259b3fc5
View
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmmm. Whole file is smaller... 50.856.960...
apps_compressed.bin
Decrypted with PSAS... but I can't decompress...
Anyway.
CRC32 (32 bit) could be used...
The Question could be, where the content starts and ends correct to fit size to make crc32...
Best Regards

wait u're talking about the apps_compressed...
while I'm talking about the ffs/app files...which have a 16byte checksum in the footer!

Sorry. I'm thinking loud. As I thought they used for all files same CRC or Hash...
I compared for instance Rsrc2_S8500(Mid).rc2 and Rsrc2_S8500(Low).rc2.
As 1 Byte at Start leads to 16 Byte change at end of file... So maybe MD5 too used by Multiloader.
Again. I'm thinking loud.
Best Regards

No progress. But few Screenshots for better understanding...
If we manipulate *.FFS we can't flash. (ALL other files protected too...)
Test 1.
I changed 1 useless Byte...
Somewhere blabla.jad in blabla.jam
Multiloader 5.64 accept to choose my file. But Error message if I press Download.
Test 2.
I add 1 Byte at the end of file. To check if some crap or if whole file is checked...
Result:
Multiloader 5.64 not allow to choose this file.
Both files tested also via Multiloader 5.62. And this Versions not allow both files to choose.
See Screenshots for Error messages.
Ideas...
Maybe disable CRC Check in Multiloader...
Or find other way to flash and check if Wave self checks Manipulation of files. Or only Multiloader is the bottleneck.
Maybe it is more complex... as I found via Internal menu the Info I've posted above... in Wave self. If Wave have selfcheck...
Best Regards

hi,
I'm not sure if you're hear about fmtBADA plugin for TriX - I wrote it few days ago (it is very simple but quite usefull). It parse any bada firmware file (*ffs, amss, ShpApp etc), so we can easly manipulate with it. After all program recalculate checksum, update all needed values so we can put file back to phone using multiuploader

b.kubica said:
hi,
I'm not sure if you're hear about fmtBADA plugin for TriX - I wrote it few days ago (it is very simple but quite usefull). It parse any bada firmware file (*ffs, amss, ShpApp etc), so we can easly manipulate with it. After all program recalculate checksum, update all needed values so we can put file back to phone using multiuploader
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what u talking about?
let us know more...
I made lots of research on ffs and app files...

I put some files at NokiX site (check my homepage), so you can play with firmware files quite easily. GUI is qt based so you need to download Qt libraries for the first time. Two packages you will find in bada subdir - program and scripts.
Start program, at General tab select input and output file (e.g. FFS PFS ShpApp,amss). Go to the Scripts tab and load scripts you want to fire up.
For the first time I reccomend you to try fs_shell script - it is simly command line script to edit filesystem images (ffs,pfs,shpapp). You can list, dump delete rename files, adding is not supported yet (but can be easy implemented - scripts are written in pure C).
Before asking just play with it
br,
Bartek

ok then I don't need it already made more
thanks to a russian friend, I probably solved the checksum problem
good news will come the next days

Nice. I have extracted *.FFS and ShpApp.app files.
I'm blind to find the Button where Rename or Delete is stored to output file.
How to save my changes to file?
Best Regards
Edit:
Maybe my fault...
I have bada_scripts_20110104.zip.
Will look into bada_20110106.zip

kubica no reason to make a new script, I'll post something in the next days if it's ok to you, take care about the amss
if you want to do it for personal reason, no problem of course

nevermind, script was already done
you're working on some kind of file system tool, right? We're lucky guys FS images have very simply structure (as you know), only one md5 checksum on it, kewl
One of TriX most advantage is work on stages ( e.g. amss is parsed to elf, elf is parsed to memory segments, than we can edit them and TriX roll back to amss again).
adfree, yes I uploaded today latest version (can be found in repository also). As I said it is only text version (command line), more like programmer preview, and it was not designed as end user tool.
faenil, you asked about dissasembler - have you tried IDA? ( quite expensive though ). I tried in trix hack amss (resize memory segments, add own routines), all works fine, now it's time to investigate functions (some of them can be located with locate script).
Another question - ok, it's sad bootloader is crypted with RSA, but I guess is stored in flash decoded. What if we try to access nand directly using Flash_Read/Write? I can't find flash access routines in amss but i did't look
deeply...

b.kubica said:
nevermind, script was already done
you're working on some kind of file system tool, right? We're lucky guys FS images have very simply structure (as you know), only one md5 checksum on it, kewl
One of TriX most advantage is work on stages ( e.g. amss is parsed to elf, elf is parsed to memory segments, than we can edit them and TriX roll back to amss again).
adfree, yes I uploaded today latest version (can be found in repository also). As I said it is only text version (command line), more like programmer preview, and it was not designed as end user tool.
faenil, you asked about dissasembler - have you tried IDA? ( quite expensive though ). I tried in trix hack amss (resize memory segments, add own routines), all works fine, now it's time to investigate functions (some of them can be located with locate script).
Another question - ok, it's sad bootloader is crypted with RSA, but I guess is stored in flash decoded. What if we try to access nand directly using Flash_Read/Write? I can't find flash access routines in amss but i did't look
deeply...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not that experienced unfortunately I needed a disassembler (person) not a disassembler (software)
btw I needed it to discover that it was md5 and on which bytes it was computed and I discovered this yesterday evening
So now we know everything about ffs and app
Still have to understand the new values in pfs header...if you already know that raise your hand
Btw, yes I'm working on something like that I won't have time now to do the GUI, so I'll probably leave it as an "experienced users only" for the moment...
I've got lots to study for university, and some programming projects to end (for uni too) so my spare time is almost finished and I still have to release a custom firmware for i8910 and a software for that firmware for Symbian...
damn I'm full of things to do xD
I'll send u a pm though, if you want to chat a lil

all file footer looks the same
typedef struct s_bada_footer // last 1024 bytes
{
unsigned int magic; // always 0xABCDABCD
unsigned int addr; // nand(?) address
unsigned int unk0; // SBZ (=Should Be Zero)
char name[32]; // e.g. S8500
char ext[8]; // e.g. mbn, ffs
unsigned int unk1[5]; // some flags, values, to be checked later
t_cert_info info; // crypto data ( zeroed if file is not crypted )
char md5sum[16]; // MD5 sum of image ( without footer )
char padd[424]; // padding bytes, SBZ
} t_bada_priv;
typedef struct t_cert_info // 512 bytes
{
unsigned int magic; // 0x79461379
char cert0[324]; // ...
unsigned int magic; // 0x79461379
unsigned int length; // crypted length ( without footer )
char cert1[16]; // exist in image also at ( length - 0x10 ) position
char publickey[64]; // ?
char name[64]; // e.g. S8500+XX+JEE
char tool[32]; // TkToolVer famous string
}
headers are different. boot_loader, Apps, Rsrc1, Rsrc2, fota and CSC don't have header.
dbl and Amss have 0x200 bytes header.
ShpApp, Factory FS, Partial FS have 0x60 bytes header
Code:
typedef struct s_bada_object
{
unsigned int offset;
unsigned int length;
char name[24];
} t_bada_object;
typedef struct s_bada_hdr200
{
unsigned int magic; // 0x12345678
unsigned int count; // count of objects below
char padd[24]; // padding bytes
t_bada_object[15]; // not used SBZ
} t_bada_hdr200;
typedef struct s_bada_hdr60
{
wchar_t name[16]; // UCS-2 name
unsigned int unk0[14]; // unknown
char padd[8]; // FF FF FF
} t_bada_hdr200;
from my observations, unk0 fields in FS system header are not *SO* important - I just preserve original values, removed files I want from factory FS, and put file back to phone

all file footer looks the same
Code:
typedef struct s_bada_footer // last 1024 bytes
{
unsigned int magic; // always 0xABCDABCD
unsigned int addr; // nand(?) address
unsigned int unk0; // SBZ (=Should Be Zero)
char name[32]; // e.g. S8500
char ext[8]; // e.g. mbn, ffs
unsigned int unk1[5]; // some flags, values, to be checked later
t_cert_info info; // crypto data ( zeroed if file is not crypted )
char md5sum[16]; // MD5 sum of image ( without footer )
char padd[424]; // padding bytes, SBZ
} t_bada_priv;
typedef struct t_cert_info // 512 bytes
{
unsigned int magic; // 0x79461379
char cert0[324]; // ...
unsigned int magic; // 0x79461379
unsigned int length; // crypted length ( without footer )
char cert1[16]; // exist in image also at ( length - 0x10 ) position
char publickey[64]; // ?
char name[64]; // e.g. S8500+XX+JEE
char tool[32]; // TkToolVer famous string ;)
}
headers are different. boot_loader, Apps, Rsrc1, Rsrc2, fota and CSC don't have header.
dbl and Amss have 0x200 bytes header.
ShpApp, Factory FS, Partial FS have 0x60 bytes header
Code:
typedef struct s_bada_object
{
unsigned int offset;
unsigned int length;
char name[24];
} t_bada_object;
typedef struct s_bada_hdr200
{
unsigned int magic; // 0x12345678
unsigned int count; // count of objects below
char padd[24]; // padding bytes
t_bada_object[15]; // not used SBZ
} t_bada_hdr200;
typedef struct s_bada_hdr60
{
wchar_t name[16]; // UCS-2 name
unsigned int unk0[14]; // unknown
char padd[8]; // FF FF FF
} t_bada_hdr200;
from my observations, unk0 fields in FS system header are not *SO* important - I just preserve original values, removed files I want from factory FS, and put file back to phone

CSC has got its header, it's just that there are more files into 1
after about half the file, we come back to the same plain structure

very simple ( 2KB ) partial file system in attachment, all values from header preserved
Code:
FileSystem Shell
---------------------------
<1.> List Files
<2.> Get File
<3.> Put File
<4.> Delete File
<5.> Rename File
<6.> Dump all files
<0.> Quit
Type Size Flags Name
DIR 0x00000000 0x00000000 /Arggh
FILE 0x00000000 0x00000000 /Arggh/it_works.txt

Running Homebrew Native Executables - Status: DONE!!

[2012/06/03] IMPORTANT UPDATE HERE
Hi hackers,
This is meant as a little update on one of the projects I've been working on. I'm kinda stuck now. I have a suspicion of what the problem is. I thought that maybe if I write a post about it, me or someone else will have an idea on how to get this working.
The goal is to run native homebrew executables on WP7
This has not been done yet. All apps are Silverlight apps that are compiled as DLL and run by Taskhost.exe with least privileges. All other executables are signed by Microsoft. Executables that are compiled as ARM executable cannot be started.
The angle is to create a certificate that allows to sign a WP7 executable. Then add that to the appropriate certificate store. Create an executable. Sign it with the private key. Load it onto a WP7 device. Copy it to the Windows folder. Use an OEM driver to launch the executable.
First I did research on the certificate stores. I can now with certainty state that there are 4 certificate stores:
- CA
- Root
- My
- Code Integrity
After a lot of research I finally got complete read/write access to all of these stores. The Code Integrity store contains all the certificates that are used by the Loader Verifier to verify the executable that is being launched. When the device is launched for the first time, the certificates that are in \Windows\ciroots.p7b are installed to that certificate store. These certificates have these properties:
Key Usage = 0x86 = Digital Signature, Certificate Signing, Off-line CRL Signing, CRL Signing
Entended Key Usage = Code Signing (1.3.6.1.5.5.7.3.3) + Unknown key usage (1.3.6.1.4.1.311.10.3.14)
So I used OpenSSL to create such an certificate (with private key) for myself. And I installed the certificate in the Code Integrity store.
I then used VS2008 to create a completely barebone executable (ARMv4 Console app with only Sleep(-1) in the Main). I signed it with SignTool from Microsoft.
I loaded the executable to my device and I copied it to the \Windows folder (I think the policies restrict executing to only from that folder, but I'm not sure about that).
I use the Samsung driver to launch the executable, because I need at least Standard Rights to launch an executable. The Samsung driver has Elevated Rights. My own app has only Least Privileges. Using the Samsung driver does not return any success or fail codes. But looking at the Running Processes list, I don't see my Test.exe running. It should be, because the main thread is put to sleep infinitely.
So why is this not working?
Well, I have a guess. I think it's the policies that bind the certificates in the Code Integrity store to the different accounts/chambers. In the \Windows folder there are a lot of policy xml-files. On fist boot, these are merged into PolicyCommit.xml and then compiled to policydb.vol. When the Loader Verifier (lvmod.dll) loads an executable, it queries the policies to determine access rights and chamber for that executable. The policies that matter in this context are defined in 8314B832-8D03-444f-9A2A-1EF6FADCC3B8.policy.xml. It's an xml-file that basically says this:
Code:
Microsoft Mobile Device Privileged PCA - ced778d7bb4cb41d26c40328cc9c0397926b4eea - not used in this context
Microsoft Mobile Device TCB PCA - 88bcaec267ef8b366c6e6215ac4028e7a1be2deb - honored by System Identity Group
Microsoft Mobile Device Unprivileged PCA - 1c8229f5c8d6e256bdcb427cc5521ec2f8ff011a - honored by Standard Right Identity Group
Microsoft Mobile Device VSD PCA - 91b318116f8897d2860733fdf757b93345373574 - not used in this context
VeriSign Mobile Root Authority for Microsoft - 069dbcca9590d1b5ed7c73de65795348e58d4ae3 - honored by LPC Identity Group
I should find a way to add a policy with my certificate in it. Any ideas?
Ciao,
Heathcliff74

If you are able to re-sign an executable that is already in the ROM, i would try that, so you know the problem isn't within the native code, but only with the signing. Or maybe the other way round which would be awesome.
regards

Flow WP7 said:
If you are able to re-sign an executable that is already in the ROM, i would try that, so you know the problem isn't within the native code, but only with the signing. Or maybe the other way round which would be awesome.
regards
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a good idea. I must say that I don't have much faith in the current RecMod tools for WP7 right now. I am able to get the binaries recmodded so that I can disassemble them correctly. But I don't think they can be easily launched. But there are executables that are on the rom as complete binaries, instead of rom-modules. To begin with, I have to select one that does not need much privileges to run and try to sign that one and then run it.
I'm really busy with work right now, so I think I won't be able to try it until the day after tomorrow. But I will try it and will let know how that went.
Thanks!

Decompiled taskhost.exe, so it gets more easy for us to see if its able to make taskhost to start another exe for us. Lots of code tho (C code).
taskhost.c (276 KB) in attachments.
edit: Oh, WOW, this really shows how to call those anonymous methods without call signature "Hello" (signature: "??z_Hello_?mze")
Hmm, pretty much about the pause part?
Code:
if ( v10 )
{
a7 = sub_178E7(v10);
if ( a7 >= 0 )
{
a7 = sub_180A5(v7, v7 + 64);
if ( a7 >= 0 )
{
a7 = ThemeInitialize(v7 + 136);
if ( a7 >= 0 )
{
v11 = sub_1862B(v13, v7);
EnableHostAutoDehydration(v11 == 3);
v16 = 0;
a7 = InitializeEmClientEx(&a2, 0, &v16);
if ( a7 >= 0 )
{
a7 = RegisterPausedHostCallback(sub_19D0D, 0);
if ( a7 >= 0 )
{
a7 = RegisterResumingHostCallback(sub_19D31, 0);
if ( a7 >= 0 )
{
if ( v11 != 3
|| (a7 = RegisterDehydrateHostCallback(sub_19D76, 0), a7 >= 0)
&& (a7 = RegisterFreezeHostCallback(sub_19D97, 0), a7 >= 0) )
{
a7 = RegisterExitHostCallback(sub_19D55, 0);
if ( a7 >= 0 )
a7 = sub_17C0A(*(_DWORD *)(v7 + 128), 0);
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
UIX framework entry-point (exe)
Code:
int __cdecl sub_11114(int a1, int a2, int a3)
{
int v4; // [sp+0h] [bp-38h]@1
char Dst; // [sp+4h] [bp-34h]@1
int v6; // [sp+8h] [bp-30h]@1
int v7; // [sp+Ch] [bp-2Ch]@1
int v8; // [sp+18h] [bp-20h]@1
int v9; // [sp+28h] [bp-10h]@1
v4 = 0;
memset(&Dst, 0, 0x34u);
v8 = a3;
v6 = (int)L"res://FlightModeUXDLL!FlightMode.uix";
v7 = (int)L"FMMain";
v9 = 2;
RunApplication(&v4);
return dword_12034;
}
C++ converted
Code:
UIXApplicationInfo app;
app { ... }
RunApplication(&app);
struct UIXApplicationInfo
{
int UNK_v4 = 0;
char Dst = {0};
char* uixFile;
char* uixEntryPoint;
int UNK_v8;
int UNK_v9 = 2;
}
Then just figure out the UIX part (or test the existing "res://FlightModeUXDLL!FlightMode.uix" if it launches, if so, we made it).
___
Found this in mango dump:
> Uninstall provxml
Code:
<!-- Uninstall Xbox LIVE Extras App -->
<characteristic type="AppInstall">
<nocharacteristic type="{0c17d153-b5d5-df11-a844-00237de2db9e}"/>
</characteristic>

Is there a reason you can't just use COM interop to run native code? Check out this thread for a discussion covering the technique: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=820455

athompson said:
Is there a reason you can't just use COM interop to run native code? Check out this thread for a discussion covering the technique: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=820455
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hello "co-founder of native code on WP7"
I'm fully aware of the possibility of native code through COM. I use it for example in the WP7 Root Tools. But I just wanted to take it a step further. Running native executables give a lot more freedom. Not being bound to the watchdog, getting higher privileges and running in the background for instance. But there's a whole lot more. So that's why I started research on it. Thanks anyway. You helped making native code possible on WP7.
Ciao,
Heathcliff74

The taskhost.exe is our RAM, because our app run in it, giving us full RAM access inside our "viritual ram". So that means we own all strings, int, floats etc. Then rewrite the ram to change strings in mscorlib. The checksum if an exe has been modified is only checked at startup, without checking if we modify the dll at runtime.
My purpose with this is that some function's call external apps, where we rewrite the args going in to the function. Just find an exploitable function and modify it after JIT has been there one before generating the pre ram, that we modify and call yet again but with the modified ram values behind.
Marshal.Copy, my friends, there.
[SecurityFuckingSafeCritical]
(byte[] source, IntPtr destination, int length)
> Interopservices leaked dll (\windows)
destination = our ram ptr to modify.

fiinix said:
The taskhost.exe is our RAM, because our app run in it, giving us full RAM access inside our "viritual ram". So that means we own all strings, int, floats etc. Then rewrite the ram to change strings in mscorlib. The checksum if an exe has been modified is only checked at startup, without checking if we modify the dll at runtime.
My purpose with this is that some function's call external apps, where we rewrite the args going in to the function. Just find an exploitable function and modify it after JIT has been there one before generating the pre ram, that we modify and call yet again but with the modified ram values behind.
Marshal.Copy, my friends, there.
[SecurityFuckingSafeCritical]
(byte[] source, IntPtr destination, int length)
> Interopservices leaked dll (\windows)
destination = our ram ptr to modify.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmmm. 10 Points for inventiveness But I don't think it's going to work. Even if you could find a function where the executable is passed as argument you still don't have enough privileges. Most code will have the path to the executable hardcoded instead of an argument. And you will still run under TaskHost with Least Privileges. And you need to have at least Standard Privileges or higher to launch most executables with CreateProcess() or ShellExecuteEx().
Sent from my OMNIA7 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App

Heathcliff74 said:
Hmmm. 10 Points for inventiveness But I don't think it's going to work. Even if you could find a function where the executable is passed as argument you still don't have enough privileges. Most code will have the path to the executable hardcoded instead of an argument. And you will still run under TaskHost with Least Privileges. And you need to have at least Standard Privileges or higher to launch most executables with CreateProcess() or ShellExecuteEx().
Sent from my OMNIA7 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"And you will still run under TaskHost with Least Privileges"
I know, i dont need standard rights to do it. Because i call a mscorlib function that is trusted code. I think you saw my idea wrong, let me show you.
[mscorlib, SecuritySafeCritical]
public static void example(string str)
{
string mscorlibStr = "you cant change my value ";
Debug.WriteLine(mscorlibStr + str);
}
This is where we modify "mscorlibStr" in ram and the function is still trusted code. But its doing something totally different from that it would do.

fiinix said:
"And you will still run under TaskHost with Least Privileges"
I know, i dont need standard rights to do it. Because i call a mscorlib function that is trusted code. I think you saw my idea wrong, let me show you.
[mscorlib, SecuritySafeCritical]
public static void example(string str)
{
string mscorlibStr = "you cant change my value ";
Debug.WriteLine(mscorlibStr + str);
}
This is where we modify "mscorlibStr" in ram and the function is still trusted code. But its doing something totally different from that it would do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really hate to break it for you. But the [SecuritySafeCritical] is indeed trusted code, but it will still check your privileges. All the API functions that do system modifications like that, do the security checks. Read the note under SecuritySafeCriticalAttribute here. Also read this; same problem. You are in process TaskHost.exe and it is launched in LPC (Least Privilege Chamber), so every CeImpersonateToken() to do the important stuff will fail and return an error code. I also wouldn't know how you would modify the stack-frame of a function that you call. Seems impossible to me, because at the moment you call the function, that stack-frame has not been allocated yet.
Anyway, although I don't think that is going to work in any way, I absolutely don't want to discourage you, because my experience is that when you try enough, sooner or later you will find an exploit
Ciao,
Heathcliff74

Currently installing "Windows Embeded Compact 7", because this lousy ARMv4 compiler (from WM5-6) maybe generates wrong ARM op-codes (WP7 runs ARMv7), therefore it says "Invalid program signature" (or what error it was).
Maybe ARMv7 is'nt even backwards compatibility with ARMv4.
By compiling with the ARMv7 compiler from WEM7, it will probably (hope) generate a valid exe.
Thats it..
edit:
*Research
"Armv7 is the processor instruction set used starting with the S5L8920 in the iPhone 3GS and in all subsequent devices. Processors that support Armv7 instructions are backward compatible with Armv6 instructions, but attempting to run binaries compiled for Arm7 on older, Armv6 processors will result in the error: "Bad CPU type in executable"."
Source: http://theiphonewiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Armv7
___
"As I said in the past, the ARMv6 CTR was kept backwards compatible with
> > > earlier versions of the ARM architecture (and ARM tried to keep it like
> > > this as much as possible). With ARMv7, you have multiple levels of cache
> > > and different types (e.g. ASID-tagged VIVT I-cache). There is no way you
> > > could encode the useful information while keeping the same (and only)
> > > register, hence the the need for a new register."
Source: http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg58813.html
As i see this (^), all ARMv > 6 == no backwards
ARMv6 had backwards to 4
ARMv7 >> ARMv6 compatibility, not more.
_
Problem officer even running ARMv4???
>On a non ARMv4 backwards compatibility CPU.
Profit!!
__
[ExeX.exe] (the one that i recompiled to a state: "this has to work")(ARMv4)
Decompilation:
Code:
; Attributes: bp-based frame
EXPORT start
start
var_20= -0x20
oldR4= -0x1C
oldR5= -0x18
oldR6= -0x14
oldR7= -0x10
oldR11= -0xC
oldSP= -8
oldLR= -4
MOV R12, SP
STMFD SP!, {R4-R7,R11,R12,LR}
ADD R11, SP, #0x1C
SUB SP, SP, #4
MOV R4, R3
MOV R5, R2
MOV R6, R1
MOV R7, R0
.
Next up, decompile a ARMv7 from a raw device. (how, someone has one)

fiinix said:
Next up, decompile a ARMv7 from a raw device. (how, someone has one)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you'll find what you're looking for here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=681659 in the dump of the IMAGEFS. What did you use to decompile it? IDA Pro, or a different thing?

athompson said:
I think you'll find what you're looking for here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=681659 in the dump of the IMAGEFS. What did you use to decompile it? IDA Pro, or a different thing?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IDA Pro, yes. Ill see if i can dump that "nbh" (used to nb0), and extract a fully operable exe that is not corrupted.

fiinix said:
IDA Pro, yes. Ill see if i can dump that "nbh" (used to nb0), and extract a fully operable exe that is not corrupted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First use Andim's WP7 Rom Tools to extract the rommodules. Remember to always dump a folder, not a single file.
Then use Denomitor's version of Recmod and follow the instructions in the post. That works most of the time.

Going forward
Currently building the WP7 ARMv7 commandline, getting closer.
Current cmd (not working, no need to help):
Code:
"C:\WINCE700\sdk\bin\i386\arm\cl.exe" /Od /D "_DEBUG" /D "_WIN32_WCE=0x700" /D "UNDER_CE" /D "ZUNE_HD" /D "WINCE" /D "DEBUG" /D "_WINDOWS" /D "ARM" /D "_ARM_" /D "_UNICODE" /D "UNICODE" /D "_CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS" /Gm /EHsc /MTd /Gy /fp:fast /GR- /Fo"C:\Users\Steven VM\Desktop\ARMv7\Build\Debug/" /Fd"C:\Users\Steven VM\Desktop\ARMv7\Build\Debug/vc80.pdb" /W3 /c /Zi /TP /QRfpe- /QRarch7 "C:\Users\Steven VM\Desktop\ARMv7\main.cpp"
/QRarch7 is the ARMv7.
edit:
HOORRY SHEEAT
generated:
> main.obj
> vc80.idb
> vc80.pdb
, feels soo good:
main.exe is there.
IDA Pro says "ARM AND THUMB MODE SWITCH INSTRUCTIONS", just like others.
Code:
; Input MD5 : B50E8D8395DE7CA2419464DC3CE0BC74
; File Name : C:\Users\Steven\Desktop\burn\main.exe
; Format : Portable executable for ARMI (PE)
; Imagebase : 10000
; Section 1. (virtual address 00001000)
; Virtual size : 00000018 ( 24.)
; Section size in file : 00000200 ( 512.)
; Offset to raw data for section: 00000400
; Flags 60000020: Text Executable Readable
; Alignment : default
; Processor : ARM
; Target assembler: Generic assembler for ARM
; Byte sex : Little endian
; Segment type: Pure code
AREA .text, CODE, READWRITE, ALIGN=4
; ORG 0x11000
CODE32
EXPORT start
start
var_4= -4
SUB SP, SP, #4
MOV R3, #1
STR R3, [SP,#4+var_4]
LDR R0, [SP,#4+var_4]
ADD SP, SP, #4
BX LR
; End of function start
Made an empty entry point as from above ^:
Code:
int wWinMainCRTStartup()
{
return 1;
}
PE Explorer (main.exe):
Machine: THUMB
Operating System Version: 7.0
Image Version: 7.0
Subsystem Version: 7.0
Subsystem: WinCE GUI

**** so CLOSE!
Successful copied "main.exe" and "ExeX.exe" to "\Windows", where i have the right to launch them remotely.
Method:
WP7Process p = device.LaunchEXE(@"main.exe", "");
main.exe (no signing, ARMv7):
System.UnauthorizedAccessException: Access is denied.
WP7Process p = device.LaunchEXE(@"ExeX.exe", "");
ExeX.exe (signed with CA/ROOT custom, ARMv4):
System.Runtime.InteropServices.COMException (0x800704EC): This program is blocked by group policy. For more information, contact your system administrator.
There IS different things going on! Something is missing, but what
edit:
Signed main.exe with custom XDA ROOT certificate (ARMv7):
signtool.exe sign /sha1 "[CertChomp]" "main.exe"
> Now main.exe also gets "This program is blocked by group policy. For more information, contact your system administrator."
Ill see if i can add it to startup list , if it boot from there.
edit 2:
Nope gonna hijack "fieldtestapp.exe" with my app because policy says:
Risky-mode.Activate();
Backup(fieldtestapp.exe, backupPath);
Copy(main.exe, > fieldtestapp.exe);
"LOADERVERIFIER_ROUTE_BY_NAME"
"LOADERVERIFIER_EXE_AUTHZ_INROM_ROOT"
<Rule Description="Route fieldtestapp.exe" ResourceIri="$(LOADERVERIFIER_ROUTE_BY_NAME)/PRIMARY/WINDOWS/FIELDTESTAPP.EXE" SpeakerAccountId="$(SYSTEM_USER_NAME)" PriorityCategoryId="PRIORITY_LOW">
<Authorize>
<Match AccountId="$(FIELDTESTAPP_EXE_SID)" AuthorizationIds="LV_ACCESS_EXECUTE" />
</Authorize>
</Rule>
<Rule Description="Authorize fieldtestapp.exe be loadable to $(FIELDTESTAPP_EXE_SID) and chambers" ResourceIri="$(LOADERVERIFIER_EXE_AUTHZ_INROM_ROOT)/WINDOWS/FIELDTESTAPP.EXE" SpeakerAccountId="$(SYSTEM_USER_NAME)" PriorityCategoryId="PRIORITY_STANDARD">
<Authorize>
<Match AccountId="$(FIELDTESTAPP_EXE_SID)" AuthorizationIds="LV_ACCESS_EXECUTE,LV_ACCESS_LOAD" />
</Authorize>
</Rule>
edit 3:
Seems like "fieldtestapp.exe" is ROM locked. Need to try out some other targets.
edit 4:
Target acquired "ProximitySensorDisable.exe" > "ProximitySensorDisableBackup.exe"
Successful copy == no ROM lock.
edit 5:
There exists two types of talking to the LoadVerifier (the: This program is blocked by group policy.):
Direct exe name OR special certificate
How we do:
> Direct exe (hijack exe)
How we cant do (SHA1) (Nope, ain't gonna happen):
> We certainly dont have Microsofts certificate so this way is a nodo, haha lol, no do way.
(1: direct exe name) /LOADERVERIFIER/GLOBAL/AUTHORIZATION/PE_AUTHZ/NONE/NONE/PRIMARY/WINDOWS/CFGHOST.EXE
(2: static/pre certificates) /LOADERVERIFIER/GLOBAL/CERTIFICATES/HASH/SHA1/91B318116F8897D2860733FDF757B93345373574
edit 6:
Yep, loads of edits, just for you.
Allowed exe's to run (sorted a-z) (direct exe) (pre cert removed):
Code:
ACCESSIBILITYCPL.EXE
ACCOUNTSMANAGER.EXE
ALARMS.EXE
APPCHECKERSHIM.EXE
APPPREINSTALLER.EXE
AUTODATACONFIG.EXE
AUTOSIM.EXE
AUTOTIMEUPDATE.EXE
BRIGHTNESSCPL.EXE
BTUXCPL.EXE
CALENDARAPP.EXE
CALLSETTINGSHOST.EXE
CALNOT.EXE
CALUPD.EXE
CAM_FW_UPDATE_UI.EXE
CELLUXCPL.EXE
CERTINSTALLER.EXE
CFGHOST.EXE
CFLAUNCHER.EXE
CHDIALERHOST.EXE
CIPHASE2.EXE
CLIENTSHUTDOWN3.EXE
CLOCKNOT.EXE
CMACCEPT3.EXE
COLDINIT.EXE
COMMSVC.EXE
COMPOSITOR.EXE
CONFIGDM.EXE
CONFIGXML.EXE
CONMANCLIENT3.EXE
CONTACTS.EXE
CPROG.EXE
DATETIMECPL.EXE
DCVSSWITCH.EXE
DEPOTCOPY.EXE
DEVICEFEEDBACKCPL.EXE
DEVICEREG.EXE
DIAGPORTCHANGETEST.EXE
DLLHOST.EXE
DMSCHEDULERCALLBACK.EXE
DMSRV.EXE
DMSTOOLS.EXE
DUACLIENT.EXE
DW.EXE
EDM3.EXE
EMAIL.EXE
EMAILSETUP.EXE
ENDPOINT.EXE
FCROUTERCMDTEST.EXE
FIELDTESTAPP.EXE
FLIGHTMODE.EXE
GAMESUX.EXE
IEXPLORE.EXE
INITIATEDMSESSION.EXE
INVALIDLICENSEUXLAUNCHER.EXE
KEYBOARDCPL.EXE
LASSCREDENTIALEXPIRATIONCHECK.EXE
LASSRESTARTER.EXE
LIVETOKEN.EXE
LOCKCPL.EXE
LOOPBACKTEST.EXE
MEDIAGROVEL.EXE
MEUX.EXE
MITSMAN.EXE
MMSPRPROXY.EXE
MMSTRANSHOST.EXE
MULTIMEDIALAUNCHER.EXE
MYPHONECPL.EXE
MYPHONETASKSRUNTIME.EXE
NATIVEINSTALLERHOST.EXE
OFFICEURL.EXE
OMADMCLIENT.EXE
OMADMPRC.EXE
OMHUB.EXE
ONBOOTSQM.EXE
ONENOTEMOBILE.EXE
OOBE.EXE
PACMANINSTALLER.EXE
PHOTOENT.EXE
PHOTOENTCAPTURE.EXE
PHOTOUPLOADER.EXE
PPT.EXE
PWORD.EXE
PWRLOGCTRL.EXE
PXL.EXE
RAPICONFIG.EXE
REGIONCPL.EXE
RMACTIVATE.EXE
SAPISVR.EXE
SECSIMTKIT.EXE
SERVICESD.EXE
SERVICESSTART.EXE
SETTELEPORTMODE.EXE
SETTINGS3.EXE
SHORTMSG.EXE
SICLNT.EXE
SIGNALEVENT.EXE
SIREPSERVERAPPDEV.EXE
SMSETTINGS.EXE
SMSTRANSPORT.EXE
SOUNDCPL.EXE
SPEECHCPL.EXE
SPMC.EXE
SQMEVENT.EXE
SSUPDATE.EXE
TASKHOST.EXE
TELSHELL.EXE
TESTSHOW.EXE
THEMECPL.EXE
TOGGLEBROWSERHIBERNATION.EXE
TOGGLEDOG.EXE
UDEVICE.EXE
UIF.EXE
UNIFIEDPAIR.EXE
USBMGR.EXE
WEBSEARCH.EXE
WIFIUXSPLASH.EXE
WLANEXT.EXE
WLIDSETUP.EXE
WWANDATAMGR.EXE
XDRMREMOTESERV.EXE
ZIPVIEW.EXE
ZMFTASKLAUNCH.EXE
How code (yes i know its super un-optimized, fast put together):
Code:
var doc = XDocument.Load(File.OpenRead("SamsungOmnia7_BasePolicy_webserver.xml"));
var ea = doc.Elements().ToArray()[0].Elements()
.Where(x => x.Name.LocalName == "Rule")
.Where(x => x.Attributes("ResourceIri").Count() > 0)
.Where(x =>
{
var r = x.Attribute("ResourceIri").Value;
return r.Contains("LOADERVERIFIER") && r.ToLower().Contains(".exe") && !r.Contains("CERTIFICATES");
})
.Select(x =>
{
var v = x.Attribute("ResourceIri").Value;
var l = v.LastIndexOf('/');
return v.Substring(l + 1);
})
.Distinct()
.OrderBy(x => x)
.ToArray();
edit 7:
yeah, lol i say too.
Unprotected exe (FCRouterCmdTest.exe)
> c:\Project Work\SGH-i707(Cetus)\FCRouterCmdTest\Windows Mobile 6 Professional SDK (ARMV4I)\Release\FCRouterCmdTest.pdb
mfw samsung use "Windows Mobile 6 Professional SDK (ARMV4I)"

Wow, this truly was a big step today
Done hacking today.
"After a day, there comes another day"

@fiinix,
You did a lot of testing. Good job, man.
A few comments:
0x800704ec "blocked by group policy" is THE error of the new WP7 security model. It is basically telling you to go f*ck yourself. Everything you do without enough privileges or capabilities results in this error.
The two ways of policies, exe-path and cert-hash, is result of difference between rom-modules and executables that are signed and added as a file. Rom-modules are not even normal files. You can't open and read them. They are executable sections that are mapped in rom-address-space. You can only call loadlibrary() and createprocess() on them. Since they are only executable sections, they don't have a signature, like a normal executable file would have. Therefore they are referred to with an exe-path. You may safely assume that every path to an executable in the policy files is referring to a rom-module and can't be overwritten in any way (except by cooking your own rom - who is going to unlock our bootloaders?!?) Other than that, there are a few signing certs that Microsoft has. Signing the different executables with different privileges and accordingly a different cert. Their hashes are in the policies.
Using ARMv7 isn't going to add much I'm afraid. Although it may make a difference in the exe-header. But you've seen tools that were really old, remember And they were signed to have TCB access. And they were compiled for ARMv4. So it should not make much difference.
I did some testing with certificates myself yesterday. Up until Zune totally went bezerk on it. I don't know what happened, but after removing my own cooked certs it all seems normal again. Zune started using 100% cpu on verifying certs and dropping my connection all the time. Help! So I haven't made much progress. I will try again later. Hope it will go better. And I will try to resign an existing executable, as Flow WP7 suggested.

According to policy on my omnia (webserver dumped) there seems to exist two typed of HDD, one ROM hard coded and one that points to internal sd card. It seems that all exe and dll on the sd are not "protected" and therefore can be hijacked.
Seems like ARMv4 will be enough, but to be on the safe side i compile with both, to have more chance getting it work.
Zune, hmm, did not seem to like you, maybe Microsoft DDOS'ed you lol
"Sent from my fingers on my phone", don't expect way too long text

XxXPachaXxX said:
Excuse my ignorance...I'm a noob...This hack may also work on LG devices?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At the moment fiinix and I are both working on Samsungs and we use a couple of Samsung-specific exploit to get deeper in the system and getting a better understanding of the system. The ultimate goal is to find exploits that will work for all devices. But we're not at that stage yet. Hacking is research, a lot of trying and being lucky sometimes. Just bear with us
Ciao,
Heathcliff74

MFC support for native WP7 Dll (and Exe too)

Hello friends.
I am a lazy person with a lack of time. So, when I wanted to Phone Commander to add support for exporting registry keys to a file, I found an older, freely usable code (first I tried RegSaveKey coredll function, but I coud not elevate calling Process privilegies). PCMD will be the first "ondevice" WP7 application that allows you to export this (thanks Ultrashot we can also do it from a PC by Remote Tools). Unfortunately, the obtained code was using an MFC classes (CFile etc). Probably would not be a problem to rewrite it for another entry in the file, but I do not want change 3rd code. And MFC can be useful in the future too.
There were basically two options:
1. Use dynamic linking, because statically linking MFC to ATL is not allowed (conflicts of application instances). But then I had to get the correct library and try if they will run on WP7. In the future, I'll try.
2. Take all the MFC source code (included in WM DTK) and rewrite them to work statically in WP7, with prepared out CWinApp etc. It was a nasty job, but for some classes (especially CFile) is complete and functional to use. Next week there will publish libraries, source code and tutorial to use MFC classes in ATL native WP7 projects. EDIT: See 2nd post, this is probably better way then first one.
Meanwhile small code sample to export registers (ExportRegKey is 3rd function using CFile parameter):
Code:
BOOL ExportRegKey(HKEY hroot, const CString &root, const CString &key, CFile &out);
STDMETHODIMP CRegistryX::RegExportKeySimple(DWORD dwKey, LPCWSTR szSubKey, LPCWSTR szFileName)
{
TRACE(L"RegExportKeySimple(DWORD dwKey = %X, LPCWSTR szSubKey = %s, LPCWSTR szFileName = %s)", dwKey, szSubKey, szFileName);
try
{
HKEY hKey = (HKEY) dwKey;
LONG lRes = ERROR_SUCCESS;
CString root = L"";
switch (dwKey)
{
case HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE:
{
root = _T("HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE");
} break;
case HKEY_CURRENT_USER:
{
root = _T("HKEY_CURRENT_USER");
} break;
case HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT:
{
root = _T("HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT");
} break;
case HKEY_USERS:
{
root = _T("HKEY_USERS");
} break;
/*
case HKEY_CURRENT_CONFIG:
{
root = _T("HKEY_CURRENT_CONFIG");
} break;
*/
default:
{
root = _T("HKEY_UNKNOWN");
} break;
root = _T("");
}
CString key = szSubKey;
CFile out;
out.Open(szFileName, CFile::modeWrite | CFile::modeCreate );
lRes = ExportRegKey(hKey, root, key, out);
out.Close();
TRACE(L"RegExportKeySimple ExportRegKey lRes = %d)", lRes);
if (lRes == ERROR_SUCCESS)
{
return S_OK;
}
else
{
return ReturnError(L"RegSetDwordSimple RegSetValueEx", 0x80070000 | lRes);
}
}
catch (...)
{
return ReturnError(L"RegGetDwordSimple", GetLastError());
}
}
This is also Native TRACE example to see native messages in VP2010 managed Output window.

Full MFC using
I tried FULL MFC from VS2008 CE SDK using and this is possible.
1. Exe files - success with statical or dynamical MFC linking. Drawable components may have problems only.
2. Static linking to dll: If we can want use native dll with statically linked MFC to managed VS2010 dll or application, there are two ways:
- To change our usual COM interface to MFC standard. It may be possible, but I did not try it.
- To make ATL interstitial ATL dll with COM interface, which can call exported functions from MFC dll.
3. Dynamical MFC linking to ATL (COM) dll. I mean thi is the best way now.
For dynamical linking MFC dlls must be copied to device - to appplication directory or ideally to \Windows directory. Mostly:
\\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 9.0\VC\ce\dll\ARMV4I\msvcr90.dll
\\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 9.0\VC\ce\dll\ARMV4I\atl90.dll
\\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 9.0\VC\ce\dll\ARMV4I\msvcr90d.dll
\\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 9.0\VC\ce\dll\ARMV4I\MFC90UD.dll

Develop Bugs

welcome