Dumping memory of a function - c++

I would like to dump a functions memory (void) to a byte array (unsinged char[]). Aftwerwards, a dummy function shall be pointed to the byte array and the dummy function shall be executed.
The function I want to dump:
void CallMessageBoxExA()
{
message = "ManualMessageBoxExA";
caption = "Caption";
pAddr = GetProcAddress(GetModuleHandle(L"User32.dll"), "MessageBoxExA");
__asm // Call MessageBoxA
{
push dword ptr 0 //--- push languageID: 0
push dword ptr 0 //--- push style: 0
push dword ptr caption //--- push DWORD parameter (caption)
push dword ptr message //--- push DWORD parameter (message)
push dword ptr 0 //--- push hOwner: 0
mov eax, pAddr
call eax //-- call address of the function, which is currently in EAX
}
}
Dumping the memory:
string DumpMemory(void *pAddress, int maxLength)
{
string result = "";
const unsigned char * p = reinterpret_cast< const unsigned char *>(pAddress);
cout << "Memory location: 0x" << hex << (unsigned int)p << endl;
for (unsigned int i = 0; i < maxLength; i++) {
string code = "";
stringstream ss;
ss << hex << int(p[i]);
ss >> code;
result += code;
}
return result;
}
When looking at the memory location DumpMemory prints to the console, ollydbg shows a JMP instruction at this location:
CPU Disasm
Address Hex dump Command Comments
00281627 $-/E9 044C0000 JMP CallMessageBoxExA
Is this the correct memory-location, or do I have to follow the JMP?
Memory location jump leads to:
CPU Disasm
Address Hex dump Command Comments
00286230 /$ 55 PUSH EBP ; ASM.CallMessageBoxExA(void)
00286231 |. 8BEC MOV EBP,ESP
00286233 |. 81EC C0000000 SUB ESP,0C0
00286239 |. 53 PUSH EBX
0028623A |. 56 PUSH ESI
0028623B |. 57 PUSH EDI
0028623C |. 8DBD 40FFFFFF LEA EDI,[EBP-0C0]
00286242 |. B9 30000000 MOV ECX,30
00286247 |. B8 CCCCCCCC MOV EAX,CCCCCCCC
0028624C |. F3:AB REP STOS DWORD PTR ES:[EDI]
0028624E |. C705 A8562900 MOV DWORD PTR DS:[message],OFFSET 00291D ; ASCII "ManualMessageBoxExA"
00286258 |. C705 AC562900 MOV DWORD PTR DS:[caption],OFFSET 00291D ; ASCII "Caption"
00286262 |. 8BF4 MOV ESI,ESP
00286264 |. 68 041E2900 PUSH OFFSET 00291E04 ; ASCII "MessageBoxExA"
00286269 |. 8BFC MOV EDI,ESP
0028626B |. 68 D01D2900 PUSH OFFSET 00291DD0 ; /ModuleName = "User32.dll"
00286270 |. FF15 00602900 CALL DWORD PTR DS:[<&KERNEL32.GetModuleH ; \KERNEL32.GetModuleHandleW
00286276 |. 3BFC CMP EDI,ESP
00286278 |. E8 5BB2FFFF CALL 002814D8 ; [_RTC_CheckEsp
0028627D |. 50 PUSH EAX ; |hModule
0028627E |. FF15 04602900 CALL DWORD PTR DS:[<&KERNEL32.GetProcAdd ; \KERNEL32.GetProcAddress
00286284 |. 3BF4 CMP ESI,ESP
00286286 |. E8 4DB2FFFF CALL 002814D8 ; [_RTC_CheckEsp
0028628B |. A3 B0562900 MOV DWORD PTR DS:[pAddr],EAX
00286290 |. 6A 00 PUSH 0
00286292 |. 6A 00 PUSH 0
00286294 |. FF35 AC562900 PUSH DWORD PTR DS:[caption]
0028629A |. FF35 A8562900 PUSH DWORD PTR DS:[message]
002862A0 |. 6A 00 PUSH 0
002862A2 |. A1 B0562900 MOV EAX,DWORD PTR DS:[pAddr]
002862A7 |. FFD0 CALL EAX
002862A9 |. 5F POP EDI
002862AA |. 5E POP ESI
002862AB |. 5B POP EBX
002862AC |. 81C4 C0000000 ADD ESP,0C0
002862B2 |. 3BEC CMP EBP,ESP
002862B4 |. E8 1FB2FFFF CALL 002814D8 ; [_RTC_CheckEsp
002862B9 |. 8BE5 MOV ESP,EBP
002862BB |. 5D POP EBP
002862BC \. C3 RETN
Pointing the dummy function at the byte array:
void(*func_ptr)();
func_ptr = (void(*)()) &foo[0]; // make function point to foo[]
(*func_ptr)(); // Call the function
Is this the correct way to make the dummy function point to the byte array?
At which point is the function's end reached? Should I simply check for the different return opcodes (C3 -> return near to caller, CB -> return far to caller, ...)?
PS:
A simple (e.g. not very elaborate) solution is preferred as I am new to C++.
Edit: I want to achieve this in a Windows environment.

You need to store the "copied" function on a block of memory allocated using VirtualAllocEx. On modern OSs, there is a bit on each page which declares whether its contents are executable or not. This is used to minimize the damage of buffer overruns. By default, your memory is not executable. If you use VirtualAllocEx with the PAGE_EXECUTE_READWRITE protection mode, you'll be able to write to a block of memory and then execute from it.
As for your question of "when do you reach the end of a function," that is actually not answerable. There are common patterns you can look for, but x86 lacks any way of identifying the "end" of a function.

It looks like you need to follow the jump. When you follow the jump, the code you're seeing matches what you compiled above.
Also, your DumpMemory is using the address of pAddressIn. Your function is being passed a variable called pAddress. Either this is a typo, or you're referencing a variable declared somewhere else. I assume you meant to use pAddress.
The memory you allocate may need special privilege to be allowed to run. As is, the memory you allocate with the raw function data will be marked as "data". "Data Execution Prevention" may stop this depending on your environment.

Related

Is vftable[0] stores the first virtual function or RTTI Complete Object Locator?

It's known to us that C++ use a vftable to dynamicly decide which virtual function should be called. And I want to find out the mechanism behind it when we call virtual function. I have compiled the following code to assembly.
using namespace std;
class Animal {
int age;
public:
virtual void speak() {}
virtual void wash() {}
};
class Cat : public Animal {
public:
virtual void speak() {}
virtual void wash() {}
};
void main()
{
Animal* animal = new Cat;
animal->speak();
animal->wash();
}
The assembly code is massive. I don't quite understand the following part.
CONST SEGMENT
??_7Cat##6B# DD FLAT:??_R4Cat##6B# ; Cat::`vftable'
DD FLAT:?speak#Cat##UAEXXZ
DD FLAT:?wash#Cat##UAEXXZ
CONST ENDS
This part defines the vftable of Cat. But it have three entries. The first entry is RTTI Complete Object Locator. The second is Cat::speak. The third is Cat::wash. So I think vftable[0] should imply RTTI Complete Object Locator. But when I checking the assembly code in main PROC and Cat::Cat PROC, the invoke to animal->speak() is implemented by calling vftable[0], and the invoke to animal->wash() is implemented by calling vftable[4]. Why not vftable[4] and vftable[8]?
The assembly code of PROC main and Cat::Cat shows below.
_TEXT SEGMENT
tv75 = -12 ; size = 4
$T1 = -8 ; size = 4
_animal$ = -4 ; size = 4
_main PROC
; 23 : {
push ebp
mov ebp, esp
sub esp, 12 ; 0000000cH
; 24 : Animal* animal = new Cat;
push 8
call ??2#YAPAXI#Z ; operator new
add esp, 4
mov DWORD PTR $T1[ebp], eax
cmp DWORD PTR $T1[ebp], 0
je SHORT $LN3#main
mov ecx, DWORD PTR $T1[ebp]
call ??0Cat##QAE#XZ
mov DWORD PTR tv75[ebp], eax
jmp SHORT $LN4#main
$LN3#main:
mov DWORD PTR tv75[ebp], 0
$LN4#main:
mov eax, DWORD PTR tv75[ebp]
mov DWORD PTR _animal$[ebp], eax
; 25 : animal->speak();
mov ecx, DWORD PTR _animal$[ebp]
mov edx, DWORD PTR [ecx]
mov ecx, DWORD PTR _animal$[ebp]
mov eax, DWORD PTR [edx]
call eax
; 26 : animal->wash();
mov ecx, DWORD PTR _animal$[ebp]
mov edx, DWORD PTR [ecx]
mov ecx, DWORD PTR _animal$[ebp]
mov eax, DWORD PTR [edx+4]
call eax
; 27 : }
xor eax, eax
mov esp, ebp
pop ebp
ret 0
_main ENDP
_TEXT ENDS
; Function compile flags: /Odtp
; COMDAT ??0Cat##QAE#XZ
_TEXT SEGMENT
_this$ = -4 ; size = 4
??0Cat##QAE#XZ PROC ; Cat::Cat, COMDAT
; _this$ = ecx
push ebp
mov ebp, esp
push ecx
mov DWORD PTR _this$[ebp], ecx
mov ecx, DWORD PTR _this$[ebp]
call ??0Animal##QAE#XZ
mov eax, DWORD PTR _this$[ebp]
mov DWORD PTR [eax], OFFSET ??_7Cat##6B#
mov eax, DWORD PTR _this$[ebp]
mov esp, ebp
pop ebp
ret 0
??0Cat##QAE#XZ ENDP ; Cat::Cat
_TEXT ENDS
Supplement: MSVC Compiler x86 19.00.23026
The layout of vtables is implementation dependent. In your particular case, when compiling your example code, the Microsoft C++ compiler generates a vtable for Cat where the speak virtual function is at offset 0, and the wash function is at offset 4. The RTTI information is located before these functions at offset -4.
The problem here is that Microsoft's assembly output is lying. The generated assembly code puts the RTTI information at offset 0 and the speak and wash functions at offset 4 and 8. However this is not how it's actually laid out in the object file the compiler generates. Disassembling the object file reveals this layout:
.new_section .rdata, "dr2"
0000 00 00 00 00 .long ??_R4Cat##6B#
0004 ??_7Cat##6B#:
0004 00 00 00 00 .long ?speak#Cat##UAEXXZ
0008 00 00 00 00 .long ?wash#Cat##UAEXXZ
Unfortunately the assembly output of Microsoft's C/C++ compiler is meant only to be informational. It's not an accurate and complete representation of the actual code the compiler generates. In particular it can't be reliably assembled into a working object file.

Assembly: loop through a sequence of characters and swap them

My assignment is to Implement a function in assembly that would do the following:
loop through a sequence of characters and swap them such that the end result is the original string in reverse ( 100 points )
Hint: collect the string from user as a C-string then pass it to the assembly function along with the number of characters entered by the user. To find out the number of characters use strlen() function.
i have written both c++ and assembly programs and it works fine for extent: for example if i input 12345 the out put is correctly shown as 54321 , but if go more than 5 characters : the out put starts to be incorrect: for example if i input 123456 the output is :653241. i will greatly appreciate anyone who can point where my mistake is:
.code
_reverse PROC
push ebp
mov ebp,esp ;stack pointer to ebp
mov ebx,[ebp+8] ; address of first array element
mov ecx,[ebp+12] ; the number of elemets in array
mov eax,ebx
mov ebp,0 ;move 0 to base pointer
mov edx,0 ; set data register to 0
mov edi,0
Setup:
mov esi , ecx
shr ecx,1
add ecx,edx
dec esi
reverse:
cmp ebp , ecx
je allDone
mov edx, eax
add eax , edi
add edx , esi
Swap:
mov bl, [edx]
mov bh, [eax]
mov [edx],bh
mov [eax],bl
inc edi
dec esi
cmp edi, esi
je allDone
inc ebp
jmp reverse
allDone:
pop ebp ; pop ebp out of stack
ret ; retunr the value of eax
_reverse ENDP
END
and here is my c++ code:
#include<iostream>
#include <string>
using namespace std;
extern"C"
char reverse(char*, int);
int main()
{
char str[64] = {NULL};
int lenght;
cout << " Please Enter the text you want to reverse:";
cin >> str;
lenght = strlen(str);
reverse(str, lenght);
cout << " the reversed of the input is: " << str << endl;
}
You didn't comment your code, so IDK what exactly you're trying to do, but it looks like you are manually doing the array indexing with MOV / ADD instead of using an addressing mode like [eax + edi].
However, it looks like you're modifying your original value and then using it in a way that would make sense if it was unmodified.
mov edx, eax ; EAX holds a pointer to the start of array, read every iter
add eax , edi ; modify the start of the array!!!
add edx , esi
Swap:
inc edi
dec esi
EAX grows by EDI every step, and EDI increases linearly. So EAX increases geometrically (integral(x * dx) = x^2).
Single-stepping this in a debugger should have found this easily.
BTW, the normal way to do this is to walk one pointer up, one pointer down, and fall out of the loop when they cross. Then you don't need a separate counter, just cmp / ja. (Don't check for JNE or JE, because they can cross each other without ever being equal.)
Overall you the right idea to start at both ends of the string and swap elements until you get to the middle. Implementation is horrible though.
mov ebp,0 ;move 0 to base pointer
This seems to be loop counter (comment is useless or even worse); I guess idea was to swap length/2 elements which is perfectly fine. HINT I'd just compare pointers/indexes and exit once they collide.
mov edx,0 ; set data register to 0
...
add ecx,edx
mov edx, eax
Useless and misleading.
mov edi,0
mov esi , ecx
dec esi
Looks like indexes to start/end of the string. OK. HINT I'd go with pointers to start/end of the string; but indexes work too
cmp ebp , ecx
je allDone
Exit if did length/2 iterations. OK.
mov edx, eax
add eax , edi
add edx , esi
eax and edx point to current symbols to be swapped. Almost OK but this clobbers eax! Each loop iteration after second will use wrong pointers! This is what caused your problem in the first place. This wouldn't have happened if you used pointers instead indexes, or if you'd used offset addressing [eax+edi]/[eax+esi]
...
Swap part is OK
cmp edi, esi
je allDone
Second exit condition, this time comparing for index collision! Generally one exit condition should be enough; several exit conditions usually either superfluous or hint at some flaw in the algorithm. Also equality comparison is not enough - indexes can go from edi<esi to edi>esi during single iteration.

Hooking internal function: How do the the parameters look like?

I have already been using Easyhook in C# to hook functions of the WINAPI.
Now I am trying to hook an internal function of a program to log a specific "event".
I have been able to discover the function call with the "Ultimap"-Function of Cheat Engine:
008AEC40 /$ 6A FF PUSH -1
008AEC42 |. 68 E37EC100 PUSH Progra.00C17EE3
008AEC47 |. 64:A1 00000000 MOV EAX,DWORD PTR FS:[0]
008AEC4D |. 50 PUSH EAX
008AEC4E |. 51 PUSH ECX
008AEC4F |. 56 PUSH ESI
008AEC50 |. A1 4093F600 MOV EAX,DWORD PTR DS:[F69340]
008AEC55 |. 33C4 XOR EAX,ESP
008AEC57 |. 50 PUSH EAX
008AEC58 |. 8D4424 0C LEA EAX,DWORD PTR SS:[ESP+C]
008AEC5C |. 64:A3 00000000 MOV DWORD PTR FS:[0],EAX
008AEC62 |. 8BF1 MOV ESI,ECX
008AEC64 |. 897424 08 MOV DWORD PTR SS:[ESP+8],ESI
008AEC68 |. E8 033CFFFF CALL Progra.008A2870
008AEC6D |. C74424 14 0000000>MOV DWORD PTR SS:[ESP+14],0
008AEC75 |. 8B4424 1C MOV EAX,DWORD PTR SS:[ESP+1C]
008AEC79 |. 50 PUSH EAX
008AEC7A |. 8D4E 24 LEA ECX,DWORD PTR DS:[ESI+24]
008AEC7D |. C706 18E8CD00 MOV DWORD PTR DS:[ESI],Progra.00CDE818
008AEC83 |. E8 F8E7FFFF CALL Progra.008AD480
008AEC88 |. C74424 14 FFFFFFF>MOV DWORD PTR SS:[ESP+14],-1
008AEC90 |. 8BC6 MOV EAX,ESI
008AEC92 |. 8B4C24 0C MOV ECX,DWORD PTR SS:[ESP+C]
008AEC96 |. 64:890D 00000000 MOV DWORD PTR FS:[0],ECX
008AEC9D |. 59 POP ECX
008AEC9E |. 5E POP ESI
008AEC9F |. 83C4 10 ADD ESP,10
008AECA2 \. C2 0400 RETN 4
The function gets called here:
008CAF5F . 85F6 TEST ESI,ESI
008CAF61 . 74 29 JE SHORT Progra.008CAF8C
008CAF63 . 6A 32 PUSH 32
008CAF65 . 8D5424 4C LEA EDX,DWORD PTR SS:[ESP+4C]
008CAF69 . 52 PUSH EDX
008CAF6A . 8D8F DC120000 LEA ECX,DWORD PTR DS:[EDI+12DC]
008CAF70 . E8 2BF4F4FF CALL Progra.0081A3A0
008CAF75 . C68424 A4000000 1>MOV BYTE PTR SS:[ESP+A4],13
008CAF7D . 834C24 14 40 OR DWORD PTR SS:[ESP+14],40
008CAF82 . 50 PUSH EAX
008CAF83 . 8BCE MOV ECX,ESI
008CAF85 . E8 B63CFEFF CALL Progra.008AEC40 #### FUNCTION CALL ####
008CAF8A . EB 02 JMP SHORT Progra.008CAF8E
008CAF8C > 33C0 XOR EAX,EAX
008CAF8E > C78424 A4000000 1>MOV DWORD PTR SS:[ESP+A4],14
008CAF99 . 8B95 F0130000 MOV EDX,DWORD PTR SS:[EBP+13F0]
008CAF9F . 6A 01 PUSH 1
008CAFA1 . 8D7424 38 LEA ESI,DWORD PTR SS:[ESP+38]
Right now I am trying to learn more about ASM (calling conventions etc.). This tutorial is very good but I still don' t know how to deal with the function above.
How might the function argument(s) look like?
When breaking at the function call, the information (a simple Integer) I try to "extract" via hooking is stored in EBX, which unfortunately isn' t accessed once. So I have look for a function, where this value is passed as an argument, right?
The function 008AEC40 appears to be using the thiscall calling convention. The first argument, the this pointer is passed in ECX. The rest of the arguments are pushed on the the stack in right to left order. This particular function, a method of C++ class, only takes one argument in addition to its implicit this pointer.

Re-writing a small execve shellcode

Going through http://hackoftheday.securitytube.net/2013/04/demystifying-execve-shellcode-stack.html
I understood the nasm program which invokes execve and was trying to re-write it.
Some background information:
int execve(const char *filename, char *const argv[], char *const envp[]);
So, eax = 11 (function call number for execve), ebx should point to char* filename, ecx should point to argv[] (which will be the same as ebx since the first argument is the *filename itself e.g. "/bin/sh" in this case), and edx will point to envp[] (null in this case).
Original nasm code:
global _start
section .text
_start:
xor eax, eax
push eax
; PUSH //bin/sh in reverse i.e. hs/nib//
push 0x68732f6e
push 0x69622f2f
mov ebx, esp
push eax
mov edx, esp
push ebx
mov ecx, esp
mov al, 11
int 0x80
The stack is as follows:
Now i tried to optimize this by reducing a few instructions. I agree that till mov ebx, esp the code will remain the same. However, since ecx will need to point to ebx, I can re-write the code as follows:
global _start
section .text
_start:
xor eax, eax
push eax
; PUSH //bin/sh in reverse i.e. hs/nib//
push 0x68732f6e
push 0x69622f2f
mov ebx, esp
mov ecx,ebx
push eax
mov edx, esp
mov al, 11
int 0x80
However, I get a segmentation fault when I run my re-written code.
My stack is as follows:
Any ideas why the re-written code does not work? I've ran gdb also and the address values are according to my thinking, but it just won't run.
In both cases ebx is pointing to the string "//bin/sh". The equivalent of C code like this:
char *EBX = "//bin/sh";
But in your first example, ecx is set to the address of a pointer to that string. The equivalent of C code like this:
char *temp = "//bin/sh"; // push ebx
char **ECX = &temp; // mov ecx, esp
While in your second example, ecx is just set to the same value as ebx.
char *ECX = "//bin/sh";
The two examples are thus fundamentally different, with ecx have two completely different types and values.
Update:
I should add that technically ecx is an array of char pointers (the argv argument), not just a pointer to a char pointer. You're actually building up a two item array on the stack.
char *argv[2];
argv[1] = NULL; // push eax, eax being zero
argv[0] = "//bin/sh"; // push ebx
ECX = argv; // mov ecx,esp
It's just that half of that array is doubling as the envp argument too. Since envp is a single item array with that single item being set to NULL, you can think of the envp arguments being set with C code like this:
EDX = envp = &argv[1];
This is achieved by setting edx to esp while the argv array is only half constructed. Combining the code for the two assignments together you get this:
char *argv[2];
argv[1] = NULL; // push eax, eax being zero
EDX = &argv[1]; // mov edx,esp
argv[0] = "//bin/sh"; // push ebx
ECX = argv; // mov ecx,esp
It's a bit convoluted, but I hope that makes sense to you.
Update 2
All of the arguments to execve are passed as registers, but those registers are pointers to memory which needs to be allocated somewhere - in this case, on the stack. Since the stack builds downwards in memory, the chunks of memory need to be constructed in reverse order.
The memory for the three arguments looks like this:
char *filename: 2f 2f 62 69 | 6e 2f 73 68 | 00 00 00 00
char *argv[]: filename | 00 00 00 00
char *envp[]: 00 00 00 00
The filename is constructed like this:
push eax // '\0' terminator plus some extra
push 0x68732f6e // 'h','s','/','n'
push 0x69622f2f // 'i','b','/','/'
The argv argument like this:
push eax // NULL pointer
push ebx // filename
And the envp argument like this:
push eax // NULL pointer
But as I said, the original example decided to share memory between argv and evp, so there is no need for that last push eax.
I should also note that the reverse order of the characters in the two dwords used when constructing the string is because of the endianess of the machine, not the stack direction.

Returning Strings from DLL Functions

For some reason, returning a string from a DLL function crashes my program on runtime with the error Unhandled exception at 0x775dfbae in Cranberry Library Tester.exe: Microsoft C++ exception: std::out_of_range at memory location 0x001ef604...
I have verified it's not a problem with the function itself by compiling the DLL code as an .exe and doing a few simple tests in the main function.
Functions with other return types (int, double, etc.) work perfectly.
Why does this happen?
Is there a way to work around this behavior?
Source code for DLL:
// Library.h
#include <string>
std::string GetGreeting();
.
// Library.cpp
#include "Library.h"
std::string GetGreeting()
{
return "Hello, world!";
}
Source code for tester:
// Tester.cpp
#include <iostream>
#include <Library.h>
int main()
{
std::cout << GetGreeting()
}
EDIT: I'm using VS2010.
Conclusion
A workaround is to make sure the library and source are compiled using the same compiler with the same options, etc.
This occurs because you're allocating memory in one DLL (using std::string's constructor), and freeing it in another DLL. You can't do that because each DLL typically sets up it's own heap.
Since your error message indicates you're using Microsoft C++ I'll offer an MS specific answer.
As long as you compile both the EXE and the DLL with the SAME compiler, and both link the the SAME version of the runtime DYNAMICALLY then you'll be just fine. For example, using "Multi-threaded DLL" for both.
If you link against the runtime statically, or link against different versions of the runtime then you're SOL for the reasons #Billy ONeal points out (memory will be allocated in one heap and freed in another).
You may return a std::string from a class as long as you inline the function that creates the string. This is done, for example, by the Qt toolkit in their QString::toStdString method:
inline std::string QString::toStdString() const
{ const QByteArray asc = toAscii(); return std::string(asc.constData(), asc.length()); }
The inline function is compiled with the program that uses the dll, not when the dll is compiled. This avoids any problems encountered by incompatible runtimes or compiler switches.
So in fact, you should only return standard types from your dll (such as const char * and int above) and add inline functions to convert them to std::string().
Passing in a string & parameter may also be unsafe because they are often implemented as copy on write.
Update:
I have compiled your sample in both VS2008 and VS2010 and I was able to successfully compile and execute without a problem. I compiled the library both as a static and a dynamic library.
Original:
The following relates to my discussion with bdk and imaginaryboy. I did not delete it as it might be of some interest to someone.
Ok this question really bothers me because it looks like its being passed by value not by reference. There does not appear to be any objects created in the heap it looks to be entirely stack based.
I did a quick test to check how objects are passed in Visual Studios (compiled in release mode without link time optimization and optimization disabled).
The Code:
class Foo {
int i, j;
public:
Foo() {}
Foo(int i, int j) : i(i), j(j) { }
};
Foo builder(int i, int j)
{
Foo built(i, j);
return built;
}
int main()
{
int i = sizeof(Foo);
int j = sizeof(int);
Foo buildMe;
buildMe = builder(i, j);
//std::string test = GetGreeting();
//std::cout << test;
return 0;
}
The Disassembly:
int main()
{
00AD1030 push ebp
00AD1031 mov ebp,esp
00AD1033 sub esp,18h
int i = sizeof(Foo);
00AD1036 mov dword ptr [i],8
int j = sizeof(int);
00AD103D mov dword ptr [j],4
Foo buildMe;
buildMe = builder(i, j);
00AD1044 mov eax,dword ptr [j] ;param j
00AD1047 push eax
00AD1048 mov ecx,dword ptr [i] ;param i
00AD104B push ecx
00AD104C lea edx,[ebp-18h] ;buildMe
00AD104F push edx
00AD1050 call builder (0AD1000h)
00AD1055 add esp,0Ch
00AD1058 mov ecx,dword ptr [eax] ;builder i
00AD105A mov edx,dword ptr [eax+4] ;builder j
00AD105D mov dword ptr [buildMe],ecx
00AD1060 mov dword ptr [ebp-8],edx
return 0;
00AD1063 xor eax,eax
}
00AD1065 mov esp,ebp
00AD1067 pop ebp
00AD1068 ret
Foo builder(int i, int j)
{
01041000 push ebp
01041001 mov ebp,esp
01041003 sub esp,8
Foo built(i, j);
01041006 mov eax,dword ptr [i]
01041009 mov dword ptr [built],eax ;ebp-8 built i
0104100C mov ecx,dword ptr [j]
0104100F mov dword ptr [ebp-4],ecx ;ebp-4 built j
return built;
01041012 mov edx,dword ptr [ebp+8] ;buildMe
01041015 mov eax,dword ptr [built]
01041018 mov dword ptr [edx],eax ;buildMe (i)
0104101A mov ecx,dword ptr [ebp-4]
0104101D mov dword ptr [edx+4],ecx ;buildMe (j)
01041020 mov eax,dword ptr [ebp+8]
}
The Stack:
0x003DF964 08 00 00 00 ....
0x003DF968 04 00 00 00 ....
0x003DF96C 98 f9 3d 00 ˜ù=.
0x003DF970 55 10 ad 00 U.­.
0x003DF974 80 f9 3d 00 €ù=.
0x003DF978 08 00 00 00 .... ;builder i param
0x003DF97C 04 00 00 00 .... ;builder j param
0x003DF980 08 00 00 00 .... ;builder return j
0x003DF984 04 00 00 00 .... ;builder return i
0x003DF988 04 00 00 00 .... ;j
0x003DF98C 08 00 00 00 .... ;buildMe i param
0x003DF990 04 00 00 00 .... ;buildMe j param
0x003DF994 08 00 00 00 .... ;i
0x003DF998 dc f9 3d 00 Üù=. ;esp
Why it applies:
Even if the code is in a seperate DLL the string that is returned is copied by value into the callers stack. There is a hidden param that passes the object to GetGreetings(). I do not see any heap getting created. I do not see the heap having anything to do with the problem.
int main()
{
01021020 push ebp
01021021 mov ebp,esp
01021023 push 0FFFFFFFFh
01021025 push offset __ehhandler$_main (10218A9h)
0102102A mov eax,dword ptr fs:[00000000h]
01021030 push eax
01021031 sub esp,24h
01021034 mov eax,dword ptr [___security_cookie (1023004h)]
01021039 xor eax,ebp
0102103B mov dword ptr [ebp-10h],eax
0102103E push eax
0102103F lea eax,[ebp-0Ch]
01021042 mov dword ptr fs:[00000000h],eax
std::string test = GetGreeting();
01021048 lea eax,[ebp-2Ch] ;mov test string to eax
0102104B push eax
0102104C call GetGreeting (1021000h)
01021051 add esp,4
01021054 mov dword ptr [ebp-4],0
std::cout << test;
0102105B lea ecx,[ebp-2Ch]
0102105E push ecx
0102105F mov edx,dword ptr [__imp_std::cout (1022038h)]
01021065 push edx
01021066 call dword ptr [__imp_std::operator<<<char,std::char_traits<char>,std::allocator<char> > (102203Ch)]
0102106C add esp,8
return 0;
0102106F mov dword ptr [ebp-30h],0
01021076 mov dword ptr [ebp-4],0FFFFFFFFh
0102107D lea ecx,[ebp-2Ch]
01021080 call dword ptr [__imp_std::basic_string<char,std::char_traits<char>,std::allocator<char> >::~basic_string<char,std::char_traits<char>,std::allocator<char> > (1022044h)]
01021086 mov eax,dword ptr [ebp-30h]
}
std::string GetGreeting()
{
01021000 push ecx ;ret + 4
01021001 push esi ;ret + 4 + 4 = 0C
01021002 mov esi,dword ptr [esp+0Ch] ; this is test string
std::string greet("Hello, world!");
01021006 push offset string "Hello, world!" (1022124h)
0102100B mov ecx,esi
0102100D mov dword ptr [esp+8],0
01021015 call dword ptr [__imp_std::basic_string<char,std::char_traits<char>,std::allocator<char> >::basic_string<char,std::char_traits<char>,std::allocator<char> > (1022040h)]
return greet;
0102101B mov eax,esi ;put back test
0102101D pop esi
//return "Hello, world!";
}
I had such problem that has been solved by:
using runtime library as DLL for both the application and the DLL (so that allocation is handle in a unique place)
making sure all project settings (compiler, linker) are the same on both project
Just like snmacdonald I was unable to repro your crash, under normal circumstances. Others already mentioned:
Configuration Properties -> Code Generation -> Runtime Library must be exactly the same
If I change one of them I get your crash. I have both the DLL and EXE set to Multi-Threaded DLL.
Just like user295190 and Adam said that it would work fine if with the exactly same compilation settings.
For example, in Qt QString::toStdString() would return a std::string and you could use it in your EXE from QtCore.dll.
It would crash if DLL and EXE had different compiling settings and linking settings. For example, DLL linked to MD and EXE linked to MT CRT library.