I had a very busy 2018. So busy, in fact, that I have not been able to devote any time to actually discussing what I worked on! I had intended to write these posts during the end of December, but a hardware failure delayed that until the new year. Alas, here we are in 2019, and I am going to do a series of retrospectives on last year’s work, broken up by quarter.
Here is an index of all the entries in this series:
- Q1 - Overview, Learning More About DLLs Injected into Firefox (this post)
- Q2, Part 1 - Refactoring the DLL Interceptor
- Q2, Part 2 - Implementing a Skeletal Launcher Process
- Q2, Part 3 - Fleshing Out the Launcher Process
- H2 - Preparing to Enable the Launcher Process by Default
The general theme of my work in 2018 was dealing with the DLL injection problem: On Windows, third parties love to forcibly load their DLLs into other processes — web browsers in particular, thus making Firefox a primary target.
Many of these libraries tend to alter Firefox processes in ways that hurt the stability and/or performance of our code; many chemspill releases have gone out over the years to deal with these problems. While I could rant for hours over this, the fact is that DLL injection is rampant in the ecosystem of Windows desktop applications and is not going to disappear any time soon. In the meantime, we need to be able to deal with it.
Some astute readers might be ready to send me an email or post a comment about how ignorant I am about the new(-ish) process mitigation policies that are available in newer versions of Windows. While those features are definitely useful, they are not panaceas:
- We cannot turn on the “Extension Point Disable” policy for users of assistive technologies; screen
readers rely heavily on DLL injection using
SetWinEventHook, both of which are covered by this policy;
- We could enable the “Microsoft Binary Signature” policy, however that requires us to load our own DLLs first before enabling; once that happens, it is often already too late: other DLLs have already injected themselves by the time we are able to activate this policy. (Note that this could easily be solved if this policy were augmented to also permit loading of any DLL signed by the same organization as that of the process’s executable binary, but Microsoft seems to be unwilling to do this.)
- The above mitigations are not universally available. They do not help us on Windows 7.
For me, Q1 2018 was all about gathering better data about injected DLLs.
Learning More About DLLs Injected into Firefox
One of our major pain points over the years of dealing with injected DLLs has been that the vendor of the DLL is not always apparent to us. In general, our crash reports and telemetry pings only include the leaf name of the various DLLs on a user’s system. This is intentional on our part: we want to preserve user privacy. On the other hand, this severely limits our ability to determine which party is responsible for a particular DLL.
One avenue for obtaining this information is to look at any digital signature that is embedded in the DLL. By examining the certificate that was used to sign the binary, we can extract the organization of the cert’s owner and include that with our crash reports and telemetry.
In bug 1430857 I wrote a bunch of code that enables us to extract that information from signed binaries using the Windows Authenticode APIs. Originally, in that bug, all of that signature extraction work happened from within the browser itself, while it was running: It would gather the cert information on a background thread while the browser was running, and include those annotations in a subsequent crash dump, should such a thing occur.
After some reflection, I realized that I was not gathering annotations in the right place. As an example, what if an injected DLL were to trigger a crash before the background thread had a chance to grab that DLL’s cert information?
I realized that the best place to gather this information was in a post-processing step after the
crash dump had been generated, and in fact we already had the right mechanism for doing so: the
minidump-analyzer program was already doing post-processing on Firefox crash dumps before sending
them back to Mozilla. I moved the signature extraction and crash annotation code out of Gecko and
into the analyzer in bug 1436845.
(As an aside, while working on the
minidump-analyzer, I found some problems with how it handled
command line arguments: it was assuming that
main passes its
argv as UTF-8, which is not true on
Windows. I fixed those issues in bug 1437156.)
In bug 1434489 I also ended up adding this information to the “modules ping” that we have in telemetry; IIRC this ping is only sent weekly. When the modules ping is requested, we gather the module cert info asynchronously on a background thread.
Finally, I had to modify Socorro (the back-end for crash-stats) to be able to understand the signature annotations and be able to display them via bug 1434495. This required two commits: one to modify the Socorro stackwalker to merge the module signature information into the full crash report, and another to add a “Signed By” column to every report’s “Modules” tab to display the signature information (Note that this column is only present when at least one module in a particular crash report contains signature information).
The end result was very satisfying: Most of the injected DLLs in our Windows crash reports are signed, so it is now much easier to identify their vendors!
This project was very satisifying for me in many ways: First of all, surfacing this information was an itch that I had been wanting to scratch for quite some time. Secondly, this really was a “full stack” project, touching everything from extracting signature info from binaries using C++, all the way up to writing some back-end code in Python and a little touch of front-end stuff to surface the data in the web app.
Note that, while this project focused on Windows because of the severity of the library injection problem on that platform, it would be easy enough to reuse most of this code for macOS builds as well; the only major work for the latter case would be for extracting signature information from a dylib. This is not currently a priority for us, though.
Thanks for reading! Coming up in Q2: Refactoring the DLL Interceptor!