I am writing a Desktop application for professional users using C++. My current design relies on a third-party C++ component whose API is based on TCP/IP. To integrate this component might involve modifying it to replace the networking code with a conventional C++ API.
It would be a lot easier if I could leave the component unmodified and communicate with it in the way it expects - over the network. To do so I would need to run the component as a server listening on some high port for loopback connections.
I have two concerns with this loopback approach. Can anyone allay or confirm my fears?
Reliability and performance
The loopback connection might fail, be blocked or intercepted by antivirus software. Something like this: Loopback connections working in user's context but not working from Local System account
Security
I am not too concerned about someone sniffing my loopback packets but I don't want my server to become a security risk itself. Is it risky to have a process listening on some high port?
Do many desktop applications operate like this?
I am initially developing on Windows but may move to Mac and Linux in future so this question applies to all the common desktop OSs.
Reliability: if component itself is reliable then there's no problem with listening to loopback interface. If component is not reliable then it's better to talk with it via loopback interface instead of calling it's functions directly. You can easily handle disconnects and restart component to continue working, but if you would link to the component and component will fail - your app will fail too.
Performance: There's some performance penalty. Not really big with current CPU power. It should be acceptable for most applications.
Security: component should bind to localhost address to avoid security issues. But local 3-d party software (virus) software with sufficient access level can intercept or even modify communication streams. Same for any other method of communication.
Loopback connections are widly used (java uses it for intercommunication, named used it for master service control, etc.)
Related
And oppositely, how much information can an application gather about local network traffic?
And how can one restrict such behavior so that any application trying to check it will come up with nothing?
The application uses a socket connection to communicate with another computer on the network.
Also, I'm talking strictly about the Windows platform, 7 and up.
Unless your application can run at a higher privilidge level than the network service (which I doubt, because this means you can gain unrestricted access to the network device),
not,
the only thing you can try is using an already running application as disguise and use it's networking capabilities.
Our team is in the design phase of a client-server database software project. We're intending to develop a single database server system, probably using MySQL with a database interface/abstraction layer, possibly written in Java. We will also (eventually) have multiple client programs talking to the server. So the question is, what do we use for communication between the server and what could end up being several totally different clients? (Think Android, iPhone, desktop, or even a Web server, forwarding to a browser.)
The two main camps right now are arguing between using:
1. completely custom socket software, because it should allow system independence,
2. exposing a Web service of some kind, because it would provide higher-level functionality
Any ideas? I know "Web service" and "Web API" are very general terms that sort of evoke nauseating buzzword-crazy five-year-old tech media, but they are definitely a valid option. Right?
Plain socket APIs have the advantage of working anywhere. The disadvantage is that they're hard to do right.
Since it sounds like you're going to end up with a database-like API over the network, you should at least consider oData.
We have to communicate with a C++ component from a Java EE web application and my proposal involved using JMS server to communicate with the C++ component which is located on other machine.
However the developer of the C++ component wants me to open up TCP/IP sockets from the webapplication and communicate over XML. My view is that socket programming in web application is error prone and will not scale well since there is a limited amount of sockets that can be opened up.
Please let me have your architecture/design preference on using JMS vs TCP/IP sockets.
Thank you
Of course it's case by case. But give HTTP a serious chance. It is a good way to cross platform boundaries. It gives you ways to swap out the backend easily and there are many ways to scale it. I've used it from various platforms to hit centralized authentication service written in modern language. I've also done the opposite by putting frontend to a legacy code by turning it into a web server.
The best part about HTTP is that it's a standard protocol, so almost any platform is able to serve it and consume it out of the box. HTTP(S) or TCP takes care of many of the issues like reliability and security.
I would like to create a connection between two applications. Should I be using Client-Server or is there another way of efficiently communicating between one another? Is there any premade C++ networking client server libraries which are easy to use/reuse and implement?
Application #1 <---> (Client) <---> (Server) <---> Application #2
Thanks!
Client / server is a generic architecture pattern (much like factory, delegation, inheritance, bridge are design patterns). What you probably want is a library to eliminate the tedium of packing and unpacking your data in a format that can be sent over the wire. I strongly recommend you take a look at the protocol buffers library, which is used extensively at Google and released as open source. It will automatically encode / decode data, and it makes it possible for programs written in different languages to send and receive messages of the same type with all the dirty work done for you automatically. Protobuf only deals with encoding, not actually sending and receiving. For that, you can use primitive sockets (strongly recommend against that) or the Boost.Asio asynchronous I/O library.
I should add that you seem to be confused about the meaning of client and server, since in your diagram you have the application talking to a client which talks to a server which talks to another application. This is wrong. Your application is the client (or the server). Client / server is simply a role that your application takes on during the communication. An application is considered to be a client when it initiates a connection or a request, while an application is considered to be a server when it waits for and processes incoming requests. Client / server are simply terms to describe application behavior.
If you know the applications will be running on the same machine, you can use sockets, message queues, pipes, or shared memory. Which option you choose depends on a lot of factors.
There is a ton of example code for any of these strategies as well as libraries that will abstract away a lot of the details.
If they are running on different machines, you will want to communicate through sockets.
There's a tutorial here, with decent code samples.
What would be the simplest way for an application I'm writing to block all Internet access on a Windows machine?
More details:
Windows: XP or higher
Application: A basic Win32 app written in C/C++.
Blocking: It needs to be able to block and unblock at will, ideally in a way that the user can't easily reverse. (By, say, right clicking on a network connection icon in the system tray.) Also, ideally, I'd like the method it uses to allow access to be restored should the user restart Windows or reset the machine, though I'd also be willing to have the app auto launch with Windows and unblock access upon startup if the machine was reset while in a blocked state.
Internet access: Primarily, I'd like to block conventional browsers from hitting conventional http/https sites. Secondarily, it would be nice to block IM clients and client-side social networking apps. It would also be nice, but not required, to still allow local networking for file sharing, etc. (Note that only the first requirement is absolute.)
Final notes: This is not meant to be a security utility, nor will its relationship to the user be adversarial (as, for example, with a parental control utility) so it's not important for it to use a scheme that can't be worked around by a determined user. (Consider that I intend for a reboot or reset to clear the blocking. This means that any workaround a user might discover that would take more effort than this is okay.)
Thanks!
p.s. I suspect that the Windows Firewall API won't work for me because this needs to work for users that haven't enabled the firewall or don't have admin privileges, but I'll be thrilled if I'm corrected on this.
It sounds like you're intending to run applications that you don't want to access the internet. Perhaps you could run them inside a virtual machine such as VirtualBox with networking disabled.
You could do it with a Winsock SPI. The Windows SDK has a sample (under Samples\netds\winsock\lsp) which implements what is called a layered service provider which allows you to hook all the user mode functions provided by Winsock and reject/modify the calls to block network access or redirect traffic to different locations. All installed winsock applications will be affected, so in your code you could have policys for what applications can go out and the like and disabled/enable on the fly. Now a determined person could find ways around this but it would be a pain.
That said this isn't trivial to do but the sample should get you most of the way there.
You cannot effectively or practically write your tool with only a user mode application.
What you need to write is a network I/O stack filter driver. This done by writing a Windows Driver. This is different from a Windows Win32 application. Drivers run in kernel mode and applications run in user mode.
On Windows Vista and later, the kernel mode Network Programming Interface (NPI) is designed for this. This is the same API that Windows Firewalls use. These are sometimes called the Winsock kernel (WSK) APIs.
In effect, you are writing a network firewall (more or less)
here are some links
Introduction to Winsock Kernel (WSK)
Windows Core Networking Blog
The Network Programming Interface Docs on MSDN
Note, your will likely need at least two components
Your driver
A Graphical application that a person can use to control your tool
If you want to do any monitoring, you will likely need a user mode service that collects data from your driver. This works better than trying to do this in the driver. In general, you should do the minimal amount of work in the driver.
A few notes:
You need to be very conscious of security when writing this kind of software. This is very much non trivial. Software that is network facing has the highest security requirements.
Be cognizant of performance.
Your driver and/or service must be aware of the context of a calling application. This is also a security boundary. For example, an application not running as administrator should not be able to control your driver.
take a look at firewall sourcecodes