About this Course

Tech Type Performance Plus
Course Code QAOFFSECAWE
Duration 5 Days

  • Advanced Windows Exploitation (AWE)
  • Develop exploits in modern Windows Enviroments
  • Live-training format with ample student-instructor interaction
  • Develop creative solutions for the most difficult exploitation environments
  • Designed for experienced exploit developers, AWE is not an entry-level course.
  • Earn the Offensive Security Exploitation Expert (OSEE) certification after passing the 72-hour performance-based exam
  • Master course content while thinking laterally and adapting to new challenges to become an OSEE

Additionally, to get the most out of this live penetration testing course you will want to spend time in the evenings working through case studies and reviewing the provided reading material. This is the hardest and most intense Offensive Security course we offer and requires a lot of commitment from the students.

Performance Plus

5 Days

Duration
Offensive Security

Prerequisites

Students should be experienced in developing windows exploits and understand how to operate a debugger. Familiarity with WinDbg, Immunity Debugger, and Python scripting is highly recommended. A willingness to work and put in real effort will greatly help students succeed in this security training course.

Learning Outcomes

  • NX/ASLR Bypass – Using different techniques to bypass Data Execution Prevention and Address Space Layout Randomization protection mechanisms on modern operating systems.
  • Function pointer overwrites – Overwriting a function pointer in order to get code execution.
  • Precision Heap Spraying – Spraying the heap for reliable code execution.
  • Disarming EMET Mitigations to gain reliable code execution
  • 64 and 32 Bit Windows Kernel Driver Exploitation
  • Kernel Pool Exploitation

Course Outline

1 Module 0x00 Introduction

2 Module 0x01 DEP/ASLR Bypass and Sandbox Escape via Flash Heap Overflow

  • 2.1 Lab Objectives
  • 2.1.1 Overview
  • 2.2 DEP and ASLR
  • 2.2.1 Ret2Lib Attacks and Their Evolution
  • 2.2.2 Return Oriented Programming Exploitation
  • 2.2.3 Address Space Layout Randomization
  • 2.2.4 Debugger automation: Pykd and findrop.py
  • 2.2.5 Exercises
  • 2.3 Flash Player Heap Internals Key Points
  • 2.4 Heap Spray: The Technique
  • 2.4.1 Exercises
  • 2.5 Heap Overflow Case Study: CVE-2015-3104 Proof of Concept
  • 2.5.1 Exercises
  • 2.6 Heap Overflow Case Study: A Deeper Look at the Bug
  • 2.6.1 Exercises
  • 2.7 Heap Overflow Case Study: Allocation Control
  • 2.7.1 Exercises
  • 2.8 Heap Overflow Case Study: Gaining Read/Write Access to the Memory Space
  • 2.8.1 Exercises
  • 2.9 Heap Overflow Case Study: Defeating ASLR
  • 2.9.1 Finding our object in memory
  • 2.9.2 Exercises
  • 2.9.3 Obtaining NPSWF32 base address
  • 2.9.4 Exercises
  • 2.10 Heap Overflow Case Study: Gaining code execution
  • 2.10.1 Exercises
  • 2.11 Heap Overflow Case Study: Stack Pivoting
  • 2.11.1 Exercises
  • 2.12 Heap Overflow Case Study: Defeating DEP
  • 2.12.1 GetModuleHandle ROP Chain
  • 2.12.2 Exercises
  • 2.12.3 GetProcAddress ROP Chain
  • 2.12.4 Exercises
  • 2.12.5 WriteProcessMemory ROP Chain
  • 2.12.6 Exercises
  • 2.13 Executing Shellcode and Restoring the execution flow
  • 2.13.1 Exercises
  • 2.14 Sandbox Escape
  • 2.14.1 Exercises
  • 2.15 Windows Defender Exploit Guard
  • 2.16 Testing WDEG Protections on CVE-2015-3104
  • 2.17 Disarm vs Bypass
  • 2.17.1 Disarming WDEG: Theory
  • 2.17.2 Disarming WDEG: Practice (CVE-2015-3104)
  • 2.17.3 Exercises
  • 2.17.4 Defeating EAF
  • 2.17.5 Exercises
  • 2.18 Wrapping Up

3 Module 0x02 CFG/ACG Bypass and Sandbox Escape via Microsoft Edge Type Confusion

  • 3.1 Lab Objectives
  • 3.1.1 Overview
  • 3.2.1 Main 64-bit Enhancements
  • 3.2.2 JavaScript on 64-bit
  • 3.2.3 Microsoft Edge and WinDbg
  • 3.3 Type Confusion Case Study: CVE-2017-8601 POC
  • 3.3.1 Exercises
  • 3.4 Type Confusion Case Study: Read and Write Primitive
  • 3.4.1 Exercises
  • 3.5 Control Flow Guard Theory
  • 3.5.1 CFG Implementation
  • 3.5.2 CFG History and Limitations
  • 3.5.3 Exercises
  • 3.5.4 CFG Bypass Techniques
  • 3.6 Type Confusion Case Study: Leaking the stack
  • 3.6.1 Exercises
  • 3.7 Type Confusion Case Study: RIP Control and Stack Pivot
  • 3.7.1 Stack pivoting
  • 3.7.2 Confuse me again
  • 3.7.3 Exercises
  • 3.7.4 ROP preps
  • 3.7.5 Exercises
  • 3.8 Arbitary Code Guard Theory
  • 3.9 ACG Bypass Case Study: CVE-2017-8637
  • 3.9.1 ACG Bypass Mechanics
  • 3.9.2 Locating the JIT Process Handle
  • 3.9.3 Duplicating the JIT Process handle
  • 3.9.4 ACG ROP Chain
  • 3.9.5 Step 1: DuplicateHandle Call
  • 3.9.6 Exercise
  • 3.9.7 Step 2: VirtualAllocEx Call
  • 3.9.8 Exercise
  • 3.9.9 Step 3: WriteProcessMemory Call
  • 3.9.10 Exercise
  • 3.9.11 Step 4: CreateRemoteThread Call
  • 3.9.12 Exercise
  • 3.9.13 Step 5: Thread leak
  • 3.9.14 Exercise
  • 3.9.15 Step 6: Stack manipulation
  • 3.9.16 Exercise
  • 3.9.17 Step 7: Remote RIP hijacking
  • 3.9.18 Exercises
  • 3.9.19 Extramile
  • 3.10 Type Confusion Case Study: Process Continuation
  • 3.10.1 Exercises
  • 3.11 AppContainer Sandbox and Code Integrity Guard
  • 3.11.1 AppContainer Protections Overview
  • 3.11.2 Appcontainer in the Creators Update
  • 3.12 Sandbox Escape Case Study: CVE-2016-0165
  • 3.13 Sandbox Escape Case Study: Shellcode
  • 3.13.1 Exercises
  • 3.14 Wrapping up

4 Module 0x03 64-bit Kernel Driver Exploitation

  • 4.1 Lab Objectives
  • 4.2 Overview
  • 4.3 Windows I/O System and Device Drivers
  • 4.4 Communicating with Drivers
  • 4.5 I/O Control Codes
  • 4.6 Privilege Levels and Ring0 Payloads
  • 4.7 Token Stealing Payload
  • 4.8 CVE-2015-5736 : Vulnerability Overview
  • 4.9 CVE-2015-5736 : Overwriting the callback function
  • 4.9.1 Exercises
  • 4.10 CVE-2015-5736 : Triggering the Vulnerable Code
  • 4.10.1 Exercises
  • 4.11 CVE-2015-5736 : SMEP Says Hello
  • 4.11.1 Exercise
  • 4.12 CVE-2015-5736 : Introduction to Memory Paging and Structures
  • 4.12.1 Exercise
  • 4.13 CVE-2015-5736 : The PML4 Self-reference Entry
  • 4.14 CVE-2015-5736 : ROP Based Attack
  • 4.14.1 Restricted Callers
  • 4.14.2 PML4 self-reference entry randomization
  • 4.15 CVE-2015-4077 : Memory Leak Vulnerability
  • 4.15.1 Bypassing Driver Checks
  • 4.15.2 Exercises
  • 4.15.3 Leak an Arbitrary Address
  • 4.15.4 Exercises
  • 4.15.5 Leaking The Kernel Base Address
  • 4.15.6 Exercises
  • 4.15.7 Leaking Additional DLLs Mapped In Kernel Space
  • 4.15.8 Exercises
  • 4.16 CVE-2015-5736 : Stack Pivoting
  • 4.16.1 Exercises
  • 4.17 CVE-2015-5736 : Bypassing SMEP
  • 4.17.1 Exercises
  • 4.18 CVE-2015-5736 : Restoring the Execution Flow
  • 4.18.1 Exercises
  • 4.19 Wrapping Up

Delivery Method

Delivery method

Classroom

Face-to-face learning in the comfort of our quality nationwide centres, with free refreshments and Wi-Fi.

Find dates and prices

Online booking is currently not available for this course, to find out more please call us on 0113 220 7150 or email us at info@qa.com to discuss how we can help.