Difference between revisions of "Windows Memory Analysis"

From Forensics Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(substantial revisions)
m (Windows Memory Analysis)
Line 29: Line 29:
 
* [http://www.dfrws.org/2008/proceedings/p58-schuster.pdf The impact of Microsoft Windows pool allocation strategies on memory forensics], Andreas Schuster, DFRWS 2008 [http://www.dfrws.org/2008/proceedings/p58-schuster_pres.pdf [slides]]
 
* [http://www.dfrws.org/2008/proceedings/p58-schuster.pdf The impact of Microsoft Windows pool allocation strategies on memory forensics], Andreas Schuster, DFRWS 2008 [http://www.dfrws.org/2008/proceedings/p58-schuster_pres.pdf [slides]]
 
* [http://www.blackhat.com/presentations/bh-federal-06/BH-Fed-06-Burdach/bh-fed-06-burdach-up.pdf Finding Digital Evidence In Physical Memory], Mariusz Burdach, Black Hat Federal, 2008  
 
* [http://www.blackhat.com/presentations/bh-federal-06/BH-Fed-06-Burdach/bh-fed-06-burdach-up.pdf Finding Digital Evidence In Physical Memory], Mariusz Burdach, Black Hat Federal, 2008  
 
+
* [http://www.dfrws.org/2008/proceedings/p52-vanBaar.pdf Forensic Memory Analysis: Files mapped in memory], Ruud van Baar, DFRWS 2008, [http://www.dfrws.org/2008/proceedings/p52-vanBaar_pres.pdf [slides]]
 +
* [http://www.dfrws.org/2008/proceedings/p26-dolan-gavitt.pdf Forensic Analysis of the Windows Registry in Memory], Brendan Dolan-Gavitt, DFRWS 2008 [http://www.dfrws.org/2008/proceedings/p26-dolan-gavitt_pres.pdf [slides]]
  
  
Line 37: Line 38:
  
 
* [http://www.dfrws.org/2006/proceedings/2-Schuster.pdf Searching for Processes and Threads in Microsoft Windows Memory Dumps], Andreas Schuster, Deutsche Telekom AG, Germany, DFRWS 2006
 
* [http://www.dfrws.org/2006/proceedings/2-Schuster.pdf Searching for Processes and Threads in Microsoft Windows Memory Dumps], Andreas Schuster, Deutsche Telekom AG, Germany, DFRWS 2006
* [http://www.dfrws.org/2008/proceedings/p52-vanBaar.pdf Forensic Memory Analysis: Files mapped in memory], Ruud van Baar, DFRWS 2008, [http://www.dfrws.org/2008/proceedings/p52-vanBaar_pres.pdf [slides]]
+
 
* [http://www.dfrws.org/2008/proceedings/p26-dolan-gavitt.pdf Forensic Analysis of the Windows Registry in Memory], Brendan Dolan-Gavitt, DFRWS 2008 [http://www.dfrws.org/2008/proceedings/p26-dolan-gavitt_pres.pdf [slides]]
+
  
  

Revision as of 00:52, 4 December 2009

Analysis of physical memory from Windows systems can yield significant information about the target operating system. This field is still very new, but holds great promise.

Contents

Sample Memory Images

Getting started with memory analysis can be difficult without some known images to practice with.

See Also

History

During the 1990s, it became a best practice to capture a memory image during incident response. At the time, the only way to analyze such memory images was using strings. Although this method could reveal interesting details about the memory image, there was no way to associate what data came from what program, let alone what user.

In the summer 2005 the Digital Forensic Research Workshop published a Memory Analysis Challenge. They distributed two memory images and asked researchers to answer a number of questions about a security incident. The challenge produced two seminal works. The first, by Chris Betz, introduced a tool called memparser. The second, by George Garner and Robert-Jan Mora produced KnTList.

At the Blackhat Federal conference in March 2007, AAron Walters and Nick Petroni released a suite called volatools. Although it only worked on Windows XP Service Pack 2 images, it was able to produce a number of useful data. volatools was updated and re-released as Volatility in August 2007, and is now maintained and distributed by Volatile Systems.

Bibliography

Memory Analysis Bibliography

Windows Memory Analysis


External Links

Jesse Kornblum Memory Analysis discussion on Cyberspeak
http://cyberspeak.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=98104
Memory Analysis Bibliography
http://www.4tphi.net/fatkit/#links