Simple thread with wait function - c++

I cannot understand why next code doesn't work. It compile correct, but doesn't output anything. Can you help me?
HANDLE hEvent;
unsigned int WINAPI MyThread(void *p)
{
WaitForSingleObject(hEvent, INFINITE);
_tprintf(TEXT("%s\n"),p);
return 0;
}
int _tmain(int argc, TCHAR *argv[])
{
hEvent = CreateEvent(NULL, TRUE, FALSE, NULL);
unsigned int ThreadID;
HANDLE hThread1 = (HANDLE)_beginthreadex(NULL, 0, MyThread, L"hello world", 0, &ThreadID);
SetEvent(hEvent);
return 0;
}

My guess is that the application is exiting before the print statement even fires. You set the event and then instantly exit. Try waiting for the thread to complete before exiting. You should be able to use the handle that is returned from _beginthreadex.
HANDLE hThread1 = (HANDLE)_beginthreadex(NULL, 0, MyThread, L"hello world", 0, &ThreadID);
SetEvent(hEvent);
WaitForSingleObject( hThread1, INFINITE );
Note: I just used INFINITE as the timeout for an example, in general you probably don't want INFINITE which could lead to deadlocks, etc. Each case needs to be examined to determine the correct behavior. Here, since you are just writing to the console, if this hasn't returned in a few seconds there is probably something wrong. You could modify the code to check the return value of WaitForSingleObject to see if it exited due to timeout and then make a decision based on that (like log an error, or something that would help to diagnose what went wrong)

You programs stops before the thread even started.

Put this in front of your return 0; and you should get some results
DWORD retVal;
GetExitCodeThread(hThread1, &retVal);
while(retVal == STILL_ACTIVE) {
Sleep(1000);
GetExitCodeThread(hThread1, &retVal);
}
retVal will also help you to see how your thread ended (given that you have different exit codes e.g. _endthreadex(6);)

Related

Thread Execution Differences Between CreateThread and CreateRemoteThread

I am trying to learn how to do process injections. First, I learn shellcode types in C/C++. However, I met a problem. One code is written by using CreateThread. That is okay but after CreateThread, I have to use WaitForSingleObject function to prevent thread from finishing immediately. Thus, the thread lasts until I exit.
First shellcode written by using CreateThread:
#include <Windows.h>
void main()
{
const char shellcode[] = "\xfc\xe8\x82 (...) ";
PVOID shellcode_exec = VirtualAlloc(0, sizeof shellcode, MEM_COMMIT|MEM_RESERVE, PAGE_EXECUTE_READWRITE);
RtlCopyMemory(shellcode_exec, shellcode, sizeof shellcode);
DWORD threadID;
HANDLE hThread = CreateThread(NULL, 0, (PTHREAD_START_ROUTINE)shellcode_exec, NULL, 0, &threadID);
WaitForSingleObject(hThread, INFINITE);
}
However, the real problem begins here. If I inject shellcode to another process, I use CreateRemoteThread but after this function I do not need to use WaitForSingleObject because it automatically lasts until I exit. I do not understand why I have to use WaitForSingleObject for CreateThread while I can write CreateRemoteThread without it seamlessly.
Second shellcode written by using CreateRemoteThread:
#include "stdafx.h"
#include "Windows.h"
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
unsigned char shellcode[] = "\x48\x31\xc9\x48 (...) ";
HANDLE processHandle;
HANDLE remoteThread;
PVOID remoteBuffer;
printf("Injecting to PID: %i", atoi(argv[1]));
processHandle = OpenProcess(PROCESS_ALL_ACCESS, FALSE, DWORD(atoi(argv[1])));
remoteBuffer = VirtualAllocEx(processHandle, NULL, sizeof shellcode, (MEM_RESERVE | MEM_COMMIT), PAGE_EXECUTE_READWRITE);
WriteProcessMemory(processHandle, remoteBuffer, shellcode, sizeof shellcode, NULL);
remoteThread = CreateRemoteThread(processHandle, NULL, 0, (LPTHREAD_START_ROUTINE)remoteBuffer, NULL, 0, NULL);
CloseHandle(processHandle);
return 0;
}
I have tried to delete WaitForSingleObject but the shellcode written by using CreateThread did not work.
You've misunderstood what WaitForSingleObject on a thread is doing. It isn't keeping alive the thread that you pass to it. It is blocking the thread that makes the call.
When the main() thread returns, the runtime library calls ExitProcess which kills all other threads in the same process. So you have to prevent reaching the end of main(), and a wait function inside does that. But there are plenty of other ways that main() might keep running, for example creating a window and entering a GetMessage/TranslateMessage/DispatchMessage loop.
When you inject into a remote process, it normally has its own lifetime and your new thread is not at risk of being terminated. Even though your injector returns from main(), only threads in the same process are killed off.

QueueUserAPC function not working, reporting error 31 randomly

The following code uses the QueueUserAPC function to add commands to a dispatcher thread in order to synchronize console output.
#include <Windows.h>
#include <iostream>
constexpr auto fenceName = L"GlobalFence";
constexpr auto dispatchCloser = L"GlobalDispatchStop";
constexpr int threadCount = 5;
DWORD WINAPI pure(LPVOID lpThreadParameter)
{
const HANDLE dispatchCloseEvent = OpenEventW(EVENT_ALL_ACCESS, FALSE, dispatchCloser);
while(WaitForSingleObjectEx(dispatchCloseEvent, INFINITE, TRUE) != WAIT_IO_COMPLETION)continue;
return 0;
}
HANDLE dispatcher;
int main()
{
const HANDLE dispatchCloseEvent = CreateEventW(nullptr, TRUE, FALSE, dispatchCloser);
dispatcher = CreateThread(NULL, 1024, &pure, 0, 0, NULL);
const HANDLE g_FenceEvent = CreateEventW(nullptr, TRUE, FALSE, fenceName);
HANDLE threads[threadCount];
for (int i = 0; i < threadCount; i++)
{
threads[i] = CreateThread(NULL, 1024*1024,
[](LPVOID) -> DWORD
{
DWORD d = QueueUserAPC(([](ULONG_PTR) {std::cout << "thread opened\n"; }), dispatcher, NULL);
if(d == 0)std::cout << GetLastError() << std::endl;
HANDLE a = OpenEventW(EVENT_ALL_ACCESS, FALSE, fenceName);
WaitForSingleObject(a, INFINITE);
d = QueueUserAPC([](ULONG_PTR) {std::cout << "thread released\n"; }, dispatcher, NULL);
if (d == 0)std::cout << GetLastError() << std::endl;//often reports error 31
return 0;
},
0, 0, NULL);
}
Beep(300, 300);//the length of the delay effects the behavior, somehow.
SetEvent(g_FenceEvent);
SetEvent(dispatchCloseEvent);
WaitForMultipleObjects(threadCount, threads, TRUE, INFINITE);
WaitForSingleObject(dispatcher, INFINITE);
SetEvent(dispatchCloseEvent);
for (int i = 0; i < threadCount; i++)
CloseHandle(threads[i]);
CloseHandle(g_FenceEvent);
CloseHandle(dispatchCloseEvent);
}
The code executes correctly about 40% of the time. Sometimes (although this is somewhat rare) the "thread opened" text won't get written to the console the right amount of times, but no error is reported from getLastError()
As soon as the loop in pure() receives its 1st APC notification, the loop breaks and pure() exits, terminating the thread.
Error 31 is ERROR_GEN_FAILURE, and per the QueueUserAPC() documentation:
When the thread is in the process of being terminated, calling QueueUserAPC to add to the thread's APC queue will fail with (31) ERROR_GEN_FAILURE.
If you expect the dispatcher thread to process more than one APC notification, it needs to stay running. You meant to use == instead of != in your loop condition:
while (WaitForSingleObjectEx(dispatchCloseEvent, INFINITE, TRUE) == WAIT_IO_COMPLETION) continue;
That way, if the wait exits due to a queued APC, the loop will go back to waiting for the next APC. The loop will break, exiting pure() to terminate the thread, only when it receives a return value other than an APC notification, such as WAIT_OBJECT_0 when the close event is signaled.
Another problem I see is that you are signaling dispatchCloseEvent too soon, so the dispatcher thread can stop running while the fenced threads are still trying to queue APCs to it. That is why the 2nd call to QueueUserAPC() in each fenced thread fails randomly. You need to wait for all of the fenced threads to finish first, THEN signal the dispatcher to stop running.
SetEvent(g_FenceEvent);
WaitForMultipleObjects(threadCount, threads, TRUE, INFINITE);
SetEvent(dispatchCloseEvent); // <-- move here!
WaitForSingleObject(dispatcher, INFINITE);
Also, all of your threads are leaking the HANDLEs they open with OpenEventW(). You need to call CloseHandle() on them, per the OpenEventW() documentation:
Use the CloseHandle function to close the handle. The system closes the handle automatically when the process terminates. The event object is destroyed when its last handle has been closed.
For that matter, you don't really need OpenEventW() at all. You can pass the existing HANDLEs from main() to each thread via their LPVOID parameter instead:
DWORD WINAPI pure(LPVOID lpThreadParameter)
{
HANDLE dispatchCloseEvent = (HANDLE) lpThreadParameter;
...
return 0;
}
CreateThread(..., &pure, dispatchCloseEvent, ...);
CreateThread(...,
[](LPVOID param) -> DWORD
{
HANDLE a = (HANDLE) param;
...
},
g_fenceEvent, ...);
Or, just use global variables instead.
Either way, with OpenEventW() eliminated, there is no more need to assign names to your events when calling CreateEventW(), thus no longer exposing them to potential interference from outside code.
Also, you are also not closing the dispatcher thread's HANDLE either, like you are closing the fenced threads' HANDLEs.

RegisterWaitForSingleObject crash sometime if handle is closed immediately

I'm getting a crash sometimes in RegisterWaitForSingleObject (1 out of 10). It seems that although RegisterWaitForSingleObject returns, the internal thread pool is not yet ready.
HANDLE processHandle = OpenProcess (PROCESS_ALL_ACCESS, FALSE, processID);
// CRASH IN INTERNAL SOMETIMES
RegisterWaitForSingleObject (&hWaitForChild_,processHandle,OnChildProcessExit, 0,INFINITE,WT_EXECUTEONLYONCE);
// If I sleep here, then it seems ok.
//std::this_thread::sleep_for (std::chrono::milliseconds (10));
CloseHandle (processHandle);
I can replicate this with a simple sample here. 1 in 10 times, it will crash. How should I be synchronizing it properly without resorting to sleep hack.
https://filedn.com/l3TGy7Y83c247u0RDYa9fkp/temp/stackoverflow/testregister.cpp
based on your code spinet:
// THIS CRASHS HERE SOMETIMES
if (! RegisterWaitForSingleObject (
&hWaitForChild_
,processHandle
, OnChildProcessExit
, 0 //this
, INFINITE
, WT_EXECUTEONLYONCE))
{
LogDebug ("RegisterWaitForSingleObject failed");
}
// If this is enabled, then it won't crash
//std::this_thread::sleep_for (std::chrono::milliseconds (10));
if (! CloseHandle (processHandle)) // !!!
LogDebug ("RegisterWaitForSingleObject Closehandle failed");
so you close processHandle just after you call RegisterWaitForSingleObject for this handle. however if read about RegisterWaitForSingleObject:
If this handle is closed while the wait is still pending, the
function's behavior is undefined.
if look more deep - try understand - how is RegisterWaitForSingleObject worked internally ? it pass processHandle to some worker thread. and this thread begin wait for this handle. but this is (pass handle to another thread) is asynchronous operation - say for example internally can be started new thread with this handle as argument, or it can be passed to already existing working thread via some signal. but anyway - worked thread got this handle and begin wait some later. from another side - you just close processHandle after RegisterWaitForSingleObject return control. so here race - what will be first - or worked thread begin wait on handle (in this case all will be work) or you close this handle. in case you close this handle first - worked thread will be try wait on already invalid handle and raise exception - STATUS_THREADPOOL_HANDLE_EXCEPTION.
// If this is enabled, then it won't crash
//std::this_thread::sleep_for (std::chrono::milliseconds (10));
of course - by sleep you give time for worked thread to begin wait on handle. in this case he begin wait before you close handle.
solution - you must not close handle, until WAITORTIMERCALLBACK Callback will be not called. you need allocate some context, where place processHandle and pass this context to RegisterWaitForSingleObject. and when you callback will be called - you got pointer to your context back and here and close handle.
also note, that you not need open separate, second, handle for child process, but can use process handle returned by CreateProcess
Ok, I managed to solve it by keeping the handle around until I call Unregisterwait. It seems to be stable. Thanks to the answers.
I met the same problem like you that an exception occurred while debugging in Visual Studio. I tried many time and finally found the reason. If you close the handle of the process newly created, the program would crash. I tried to close the handles in the callback function, it works perfectly, like this:
typedef struct {
LPTSTR pszCmdLine;
HANDLE hEvent;
} THREAD_PARAM;
typedef struct {
TCHAR szCmdLine[1024];
HANDLE hWaitObject;
DWORD dwProcessId;
HANDLE hProcess;
DWORD dwThreadId;
HANDLE hThread;
} OBJECT_PARAM;
static void CALLBACK WaitObjectCallback(LPVOID lpParam, BOOLEAN TimerOrWaitFired)
{
OBJECT_PARAM *pobp = static_cast<OBJECT_PARAM *>(lpParam);
TCHAR szInfo[1024] = { 0 };
DWORD dwExitCode = 0;
GetExitCodeProcess(pobp->hProcess, &dwExitCode);
wnsprintf(szInfo, ARRAYSIZE(szInfo), _T("process %u [%s] exit: %u\n"), pobp->dwProcessId, pobp->szCmdLine, dwExitCode);
OutputDebugString(szInfo);
//
// unregister the wait object handle and close the process handle finally
//
UnregisterWait(pobp->hWaitObject);
CloseHandle(pobp->hProcess);
CloseHandle(pobp->hThread);
GlobalFree(lpParam);
}
static DWORD CALLBACK ThreadFunction(LPVOID lpParam)
{
THREAD_PARAM *pthp = static_cast<THREAD_PARAM *>(lpParam);
STARTUPINFO si = { sizeof(si) };
PROCESS_INFORMATION pi = { 0 };
BOOL bResult;
bResult = CreateProcess(nullptr, pthp->pszCmdLine, nullptr, nullptr, FALSE, 0, nullptr, nullptr, &si, &pi);
if (bResult)
{
OBJECT_PARAM *pobp = static_cast<OBJECT_PARAM *>(GlobalAlloc(GPTR, sizeof(OBJECT_PARAM)));
// make copy of the command line and other informations of the newly created process
lstrcpyn(pobp->szCmdLine, pthp->pszCmdLine, ARRAYSIZE(pobp->szCmdLine));
pobp->dwProcessId = pi.dwProcessId;
pobp->hProcess = pi.hProcess;
pobp->dwThreadId = pi.dwThreadId;
pobp->hThread = pi.hThread;
bResult = RegisterWaitForSingleObject(&pobp->hWaitObject, pi.hProcess, WaitObjectCallback, pobp, INFINITE, WT_EXECUTEONLYONCE);
// once it failed...
if (!bResult)
{
CloseHandle(pi.hProcess);
CloseHandle(pi.hThread);
}
}
// Notify the thread creator that the process is created successfully
SetEvent(pthp->hEvent);
return 0;
}

kill thread forcefully C++ win32

I have created a thread with this line
threadHandle = CreateThread(NULL, FALSE, Threadhandle1, NULL, 0, NULL);
I want to kill thread forcefully without waiting for a thread to finish
Thread Code:-
DWORD WINAPI Threadhandle1(void* data){
Sleep(5000);
MessageBox(NULL, TEXT("First"), L"Simple Message", NULL);
Sleep(5000);
MessageBox(NULL, TEXT("Second"), L"Simple Message", NULL);
return 0;
}
Code to Stop Thread:-
TerminateThread(threadHandle, 0);
CloseHandle(threadHandle);
You can terminate thread by using TerminateThread() using the thread handle you got from CreateThread.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms686717(VS.85).aspx
PS:It is mentioned in website:
"TerminateThread is a dangerous function that should only be used in the most extreme cases. You should call TerminateThread only if you know exactly what the target thread is doing, and you control all of the code that the target thread could possibly be running at the time of the termination."

WaitForSingleObject returns wait failed due to invalid handle

I am trying to use a CEvent to make my thread wait until the message queue is ready as per MSDN's advice so that my PostThreadMessage function will work correctly.
BOOL MFC_Thread::InitInstance(){
BOOL worked=CWinThread::InitInstance();
MSG msg;
BOOL result=PeekMessage(&msg, NULL, WM_USER, WM_USER, PM_NOREMOVE);
fingerveinControllerThreadReady->SetEvent();//Breakpoint 1
return TRUE;
}
void init(){
controllerThreadReady=new CEvent(FALSE, FALSE);
CWinThread* thread=AfxBeginThread(RUNTIME_CLASS(MFC_Thread));
controllerThread=thread->m_nThreadID;
WaitForSingleObject(controllerThreadReady, INFINITE);
DoSomething();//Breakpoint 2
}
Unfortunately, it seems that the WaitForSingleObject isn't doing its job. Sometimes Breakpoint 1 is hit first, sometimes Breakpoint 2. When Breakpoint 2 is hit first, I receive WAIT_FAILED with the cause ERROR_INVALID_HANDLE. Why is this happening?
That might be because you're passing the CEvent object instead of its handle.
Try this:
WaitForSingleObject(controllerThreadReady.m_hObject, INFINITE);