Problem: Mediate USB traffic/data
I would like to accept inbound traffic on a specific USB port and replicate it exactly as outbound traffic on another specific USB port, in effect accomplishing a USB proxy. By extension, then, the connections need to be two-way. An additional requirement is that the port must be able to fake its identity (vendor ID, product ID, ...) as seen by an external device. Should the given solution also be able to dump/log the raw traffic, that would be fantastic, although not a requirement. Target platforms are Windows and/or Linux (any will do).
Before going on an epic journey and writing a custom driver, which is fairly likely to induce brain damage, I would like to ask if anyone has ever done anything similar, or could possibly conceive of the pieces needed to assemble this puzzle. :)
I don't think this is doable out of the box, without extra hardware.
What kind of device can you expect to connect to the "upstream" port of the proxy? Assuming there's a regular device (let's say a mouse, just as an example) on the "downstream" port, the device at upstream needs to be a USB host in order to handle the USB device in a meaningful way.
But you can't connect the USB port of your computer (which already is the host for all its USB root ports) directly to another computer, that's a total violation of USB's network topology. Both ports contain +5 V power rails, and if you connect those together, you're likely in for a shock. And/or a private fireworks display. Or a trip to your nearest motherboard and/or PSU retailer ...
Also, since USB is quite dynamic and so on, I don't think you can expect the bitstream from one port to be meaningful if repeated out another port, since address information etc might change.
There are 100% software USB analyzers, like http://www.usblyzer.com/, but I'm not so sure about proxies like what you describe.
At my work we have used this Beagle USB Analyzer. It sits between device and host and captures all traffic without interruption. It works in windows and linux and functions even with USB 2.0 highspeed ports.
http://www.totalphase.com/products/beagle_usb480/
Highly recommended.
Related
I'm thinking about creating EC2 instances that run industrial software. This EC2 instance should be able to receive data from Serial COM port. Is it possible to connect things like this, with eventually a serial tunneling or anything else ?
There are two parts to the answer to this question.
Yes, absolutely, this is possible in theory.
...but it might not be practical or possible for the specific purpose/application/device that you have in mind.
Terminal servers are a simple illustration of the principle. Note that in this sense, I'm not referring to a Windows Remote Desktop "terminal server," but to the generic device commonly called a terminal server which, in its simplest form, is a physical device that speaks a serial protocol such as RS-232 on one side, and TCP on the other side. RS-232 is the wire protocol of a PC "COM" port.
But a computer, configured with appropriate drivers, can have a "virtual" COM port that appears -- to software on the computer -- as an interface just like a physical COM port, but the driver for that COM port, instead of providing the software with access to literal hardware is in fact managing a TCP connection, tunneling the send and receive bits from the COM port back to the physical port on the terminal server.
The terminal server could be an actual, dedicated terminal server device, could be a full size PC, a microcontroller with network capability, a Raspberry Pi with a USB-to-Serial adapter... there are a lot of potential variations.
Problems to consider:
A lot of older industrial software seems very poorly written. This is my impression, anyway. The implementers, perhaps working at the edges of their expertise, having made certain design assumptions that work on physical COM ports but may not be compatible with such a deployment. This is less likely to be true if the systems are newer, and run on a modern OS, but back in the early days of Windows and before, this was a real mess.
License key dongles, if present, might rely on peculiarities of physical COM ports that are difficult or impossible to virtualize. The terms of the software license may constrain you from doing this.
Some equipment may be unnecessarily sensitive to the delay that is introduced by the distances involved. There are, for example, 22 ms of round-trip time in the Internet path between one of my facilities and the nearest AWS region. At 9600-8-N-1 that is the time to transmit ~23 bytes, and that's best case -- the virtualization layer and encryption will add more. The machine or the software may or may not be well-written enough to accept that kind of delay, which does not occur on a physical, local COM port.
If the machine is being controlled (not simply observed) then you need to absolutely ensure that you are not creating a safety hazard by separating the machine from its software through a virtualization layer.
"Sharing" control of a machine by software on multiple EC2 instances seems like it might be implied by your illustration, but this potentially adds an entirely different set of complexity.
In theory, yes, it's possible. I mean, even Windows remote desktop allows you to share a local COM port with the remote system, allowing remote software to access and control your local device.
In practice, this potentially requires a lot of attention to a large number of factors that vary by operating system as well as by the specific peculiarities of the devices and software in question.
EC2 connectivity is through the network interface, so I don't think a direct connection like the one you are asking is possible.
However, if you are talking about industrial devices supporting automation, chances are you can use MQTT or at least a MQTT bridge. If that's the case, you can take a look at AWS IOT Core
With AWS IOT Core you don't only get bidirectional connectivity between your devices and AWS, but also powerful analytics, device registry and management, and full integration with the AWS ecosystem.
I am wondering if it is possible to limit/control ethernet upload and download speeds on specific transport layers (tcp/udp) using c++? I am trying to make a simple to use program that can control the speeds of any device that the ethernet is connected to. For example: Computer B is connected to computer A via Internet Connection Sharing, I use my program to limit computer B's download or upload speed to 120kbs (or any number i choose), with this I would also like to choose udp or tcp.
Basically, I want to create my own program similar to net limiter and other such software, but I also want to add my own features which many of which lack for my needs. These other features are easy enough, but I have no idea how to go about the actual limting process.
The way forward in the general case you ask about would be to create a virtual network adapter and all the monitored route traffic through it. Once that was done, then you can monitor streams between hosts or on specific ports.
Not an easy job... A starting point would be the Windows device driver kit.
If you were prepared to limit just one app, and could modify it, the task would be much simpler... wget and curl for example both offer limiting.
HTH, Ruth
I'm creating a WiFi program for Windows, I'm new to network programming.
I'm using the Native Wifi API to get information about a network but now I want information about the other devices that are connected to a network.
Does anybody know what I should learn to accomplish this? Do I need to use winsock?
You can do this via UPnP (assuming your AP supports UPnP, but most do).
You'd connect to the WLANConfiguration service of your UPnP access point, and read the TotalAssociations to get the number of associated devices, and the AssociatedDeviceMACAddress and/or AssociatedDeviceIPAddress variables to get the addresses of the associated devices. The latter might give you IPv4 or IPv6 addresses, or it might give you host names.
The TotalAssociations variable is "evented", which means you can have the access point tell you want the number of associated devices changes, and re-enumerate their addresses when that happens.
Microsoft also provides a UPnP API that may be helpful (though I've never used it personally, so I can't say much more about it).
References
UPnP Architecture specification
WLAN Configuration Service specification
I've been reading around on the www but just can't get the most important basics of P2P.
The diagram is like this:
[peer1]<-->[dsl-router1]<-->[central server]<-->[dsl-router2]<-->[peer2]
I'm developing a chat software on the central server. Chat messages being transfered thru' the central server well by now, however, I need to make the p2p file sharing feature because the bandwidth (the cable bandwith, not the transfer limit) of the server supposed for transfering chat messages only.
The problem is that, my software on central server knows the IPs and ports of router1 and router2, but not the peer1 and peer2 as these peers are behind the routers and don't have IP addresses.
How to actually transfer some data from peer1 to peer2 and vice versa without having this data passing thru' central server?
(and the worst case is that there is a wireless router between peer and dsl-router)
There are two basic ways of doing this. The new way is to use IGDP (opening a port via uPnP). This is described quite well here:
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/13285/Using-UPnP-for-Programmatic-Port-Forwardings-and-N
If neither of the two nodes have a router supporting uPnP then another alternative is TCP hole punching, which is not perfect but works quite well in practice. This is described here:
http://www.brynosaurus.com/pub/net/p2pnat/
During some situations, "routers" supplied by the ISP may run on bridge mode, which directly exposes the peer computer on the internet (the computer gets a public internet address). If at least one side has this configuration (or in a similar situation that the peer client is not behind another device), then things should be rather straight forward: simply assign the central server's job to whoever that have this privilege.
In the other case where both peers only have a local address (e.g. 192.168.0.2) assigned to their computers, it would then be rather difficult to get through the routers; clients behind routers are for the most part unreachable from the outside unless they originated the request. Then, one solution to the problem is port forwarding. By doing port forwarding, either through explicitly written rules or UPnP, some ports on the peer computer is exposed to the public internet, as in the first situation where instead of only some ports the entire computer is exposed.
If you are without either of these, then there is no simple way to avoid sending through the central server. Though you could, potentially, find other peers who have the capability to transfer for others.
I need to write a win32 c/c++ application which will be able to determine whether the PC it's running on is connected to one of 2 networks. The first network is the company LAN (which has no internet connection) and the second network is a standalone switch with a single PC connected to it (the PC that the program is running on).
I'm pretty new to network programming but so far I have tried testing to see if a network drive which is held on our LAN can be mapped. This works fine if the PC is connected to the LAN, the drive mapping succeeds so so LAN detection is successful. However, if the PC is connected to the switch, this results in a VERY long timeout which is not a suitable as it will delay the program so much as to make it unusable.
Does anyone have any alternative suggestions?
I'm using c/c++ in VS 6.0
[Update]
Whilst trying a few different ideas and looking at some of the suggestions below I thought I should update with some additional information as many (if not all) of the suggestions I don't think will work.
(1) The aforementioned LAN has no external connections at all, it is completely isolated so no resolving of external DNS or pinging websites is possible.
(2) Hostname, MAC address, IP, Default Gateway, Subnet etc etc (basically everything you see in ipconfig -all) are all manually configured (not dynamic from the router) so checking any of these settings will return the same whether connected to the LAN or the switch.
(3) Due to point (2), any attempts to communicate with the switch seem to be unsuccessful, in fact almost all networking commands (ping, arp etc) seem to fail - I think due to the machine trying to connect to the LAN when it isn't there :-(
One thing I have found which works is pinging the default gateway IP which times out when connected to the switch. This is sort of ok as I can reduce the timeout of ping so it doesn't just hang for ages but it feels like a bit of a hack and I would certainly appreciate any better solutions.
Thanks
As far as TCP/IP is concerned there is no such thing as a LAN on WAN. There are a set of non-internet routable addresses like 192.168.x.x and 10.x.x.x but these are sometimes used by ISP short of IP addresses.
You best bet is to use Asynchronous APIs when making TCP/IP connections. WIN32 defines a whole buch of OVERLAPPED APIs for this purpose. This will prevent your application from grinding to a halt while waiting for a remote connection.
Alternatively put the socket stuff into another thread and then only notify the UI when the operation is done.
I would first try to differentiate between the two using information available locally--that is, from your computer. Does the output of ipconfig /all differ depending on which network you're connected to? If so, exploit that difference if you can.
Is it possible to get the MAC address of the standalone switch? Of the switch that controls the company LAN? That would be a sure way to tell. Unless somebody cloned the MAC address.
If you try using the existence or non-existence of some network service to determine which network you're connected to, you can never be sure. For example, if you failed to map that network drive, all you know is that the network drive isn't available. You can't say for certain that you're not connected to the company LAN. Same is true if you use ping. Lack of response from a particular machine means only that the machine didn't respond.
Various things you can look at for differentiation:
DNS domain name (GetComputerNameEx)
MAC address of gateway (ping it, then GetIpNetTable)
Routing table(do you have a gateway and default route on the company LAN)
WNet discovered network resources (WNetOpenEnum, WNetEnumResource)
Ability to resolve external hostnames (try a 5-10 names like www.google.com, www.microsoft.com and so on, if one resolves you should have internet)
You'll have to decide how many indicators are "enough" to decide you're on one or the other LAN though if tests fail. Then keep retrying until you have a definite result.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366071%28v=VS.85%29.aspx has a lot of network related functions that you can experiment with to create further indicators.