![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
It seems like I'm a bit too stupid to use LiveKD. I did the following:
First I tried to show what's located at "fs:[124]" by entering "d fs:124", but I only got the message "GetContextState failed, 0x80004001" three times followed by "bad segment error at '124'. Next I only entered "d 124" and got a memory dump, but only filled with "??" as data. After that I read the help file entry for the "d" command to learn all possible "dump" commands and their correct syntax, but none of them worked, even the dump commands for psysical memory failed. So how should I read "fs:[124]" from Ring-0 with WinDBG? |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
gdt from softice
Code:
:gdt ... 0030 Data32 FFDFF000 00001FFF 0 P RW <--- KPCR 003B Data32 7FFDE000 00000FFF 3 P RW <--- TEB dd FFDFF000+124 ![]() when you get address you might wanna play with it a little bit with: dt nt!_ETHREAD <address> and so on, to explore state of some interesting structures of system. I don't know if something changed on win2k3 but you can always use wARK to get gdt and you will get address of fs without a problem As I said maybe they have changed something in internal structures so maybe fs:[124] doesn't point to CurentThread, to be sure you should explore strucutres with:dt nt!_structure (eg. dt nt!_KPCR, dt nt!_KPRCB etc...) Regards
__________________
http://accessroot.com Last edited by deroko; 04-30-2006 at 06:22. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Now I'm completely confused. I installed WinXP and Win2003 on a different PC. I also installed SoftICE on both PCs. The interesing point is that SoftICE loads on WinXP and Win2003.
Then I checked the part where SoftICE on Win2003 crashes on the other PC from Ring-0. (the code from above) On WinXP, [EAX+44] points to some other memory location, so [EAX+18] can be read normally. On Win2003, [EAX+44] has a value of NULL, so reading [EAX+18] will crash the computer. The code crashing my computer crashes it always on Windows 2003, but for some reason it is not executed on one of the PCs. Both computers have a totally different hardware configuration (chipset, count and manufracturer of CPUs, installed RAM), but the software is the same (expect for the hardware drivers). Has anybody some other idea what the source of the problem might be? |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Maybe a patch for win2003... |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
As far as I know "Patch Guard" is only available in the x64 editions. MarkusO also wrote that it even crashes with SP0 installed, which 100% sure had no support for "Patch Guard" and "NX-Bit".
@MarkusO: Can you post your hardware details so we might get behind the problem? |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|