Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Empty Provider #6

Closed
k4nfr3 opened this issue Jan 3, 2024 · 5 comments
Closed

Empty Provider #6

k4nfr3 opened this issue Jan 3, 2024 · 5 comments

Comments

@k4nfr3
Copy link

k4nfr3 commented Jan 3, 2024

Hi,

Is this meant by you that it doesn't add or link to an existing WFP Provider ?
The rules do stand out due to this (for OPSEC perspective)

Regards
K4nfr3

@pbssubhash
Copy link

The following code: https://github.com/netero1010/EDRSilencer/blob/main/EDRSilencer.c#L62 is used to manage the filter name with which rules are created. You can modify this with your custom (or existing) filter name.

@k4nfr3
Copy link
Author

k4nfr3 commented Jan 3, 2024

Hi,
that's the filter rule name, not the provider name ;-)

wfp

@pbssubhash
Copy link

My bad. misread as filter.

I think it's possible: by doing something like filter.providerKey = (GUID*)&WFPSAMPLER_PROVIDER; here: https://github.com/netero1010/EDRSilencer/blob/main/EDRSilencer.c#L147-L157

While I play around, I'd wait for @netero1010 to check the references above and see if it's an easy fix for him.

@netero1010
Copy link
Owner

Hi. I believe adding provider to the custom rule will help in OPSEC perspective. I will check if it is better to get existing provider or creating a new one. I will include this to my to-do list in the next update. Thanks @k4nfr3 and @pbssubhash.

@netero1010
Copy link
Owner

Updated in version 1.2. A new WFP provider will be created for the custom WFP filter.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants