checksec in the debugger

[radareorg]

checksec in the debugger

[jvoisin]

We already have some informations in i, like PIE, RELRO, canary, …

[radare]

Yes. But you have to go lib by lib in hand to automatize this and extract the info from all the libs loaded in memory. So this can be done with a script using #!pipe (choose python or js) its an easy task, probably suitable for rsoc

On 21 Mar 2015, at 15:33, jvoisin [email protected] wrote:

We already have some informations in i, like ASLR, RELRO, canary, …

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[Maijin]

R2-pipe python must implement an open in debugging mode before doing this

[radare]

Wat?

On 22 Mar 2015, at 14:31, Maijin [email protected] wrote:

R2-pipe python must implement an open in debugging mode before doing this

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[radare]

What makes you think this is not already done?

On 22 Mar 2015, at 14:31, Maijin [email protected] wrote:

R2-pipe python must implement an open in debugging mode before doing this

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[Maijin]

The code ? https://github.com/radare/radare2-bindings/tree/master/r2pipe/python

[radare]

#!pipe python foo.py

In foo.py just do:

R= r2pipe.open('#!pipe')
DbgMaps = R.cmdj("dmj")

On 22 Mar 2015, at 18:28, Maijin [email protected] wrote:

? https://github.com/radare/radare2-bindings/tree/master/r2pipe/python

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[radare]

well you can't spawn a debugger session with r2pipe directly now, do you
want to propose a new .debug() method instead of the .open() one? bear
in mind that we can also statically debug with ESIL.

On 03/22/2015 06:28 PM, Maijin wrote:

? https://github.com/radare/radare2-bindings/tree/master/r2pipe/python

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/radare/radare2/issues/2218#issuecomment-84660058

[dukebarman]

Will be good if we can use option in rabin2 for print only security info like in checksec:

$ checksec.sh --file /bin/ls
RELRO           STACK CANARY      NX            PIE             RPATH      RUNPATH      FILE
Partial RELRO   Canary found      NX enabled    No PIE          No RPATH   No RUNPATH   /bin/ls

And if we use own names for this options than add old (from checksec) names near in () symbols

[radare]

Which one do u propose? Isnt that already in -I?

On 09 Feb 2016, at 09:05, Boris Ryutin [email protected] wrote:

Will be good if we can use option in rabin2 for print only security info like in checksec:

$ checksec.sh --file /bin/ls
RELRO STACK CANARY NX PIE RPATH RUNPATH FILE
Partial RELRO Canary found NX enabled No PIE No RPATH No RUNPATH /bin/ls
And if we use own names for this options than add old (from checksec) names near in () symbols

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[dukebarman]

output for RELRO like in checksec, for example, and may be change sort order - this options will be place first

[dukebarman]

@monosource in his blog post used filter with ~

[0x7f5082528cc0]> i~pic,canary,nx,crypto,stripped,static,relocs
pic      false
canary   true
nx       true
crypto   false
stripped true
static   false
relocs   false

It's a same thing that I propose above, so maybe add option (new symbol) for i command

[Maijin]

Need a letter ?

[dukebarman]

Need a command like checksec :)

[radare]

Why?

On 6 Nov 2016, at 12:52, Boris Ryutin [email protected] wrote:

Need a command like checksec :)

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[alvarofe]

Don't forget ik~relro that is saved in sdb. The info is already there i don't see the need of a new command for that either create a macro or r2pipe to get info with the desired format.

[radare]

This is also related to rbin support for loading binary headers from memory

[ret2libc]

This issue has been moved from radareorg/radare2 to radareorg/ideas as we are trying to clean our backlog and this issue has probably been created a long while ago. This is an effort to help contributors understand what are the actionable items they can work on, prioritize issues better and help users find active/duplicated issues more easily. If this is not an enhancement/improvement/general idea but a bug, feel free to ask for re-transfer to main repo. Thanks for your understanding and contribution with this issue.