## Tuesday, August 31, 2010

### Episode #110: Insert Title Here

In this corner, Tim, the disputed PowerShell Heavyweight Champion of the World:

What is in a title? Titles are important and they can be really useful. An aptly named window can be useful for screen shots, managing multiple sessions, and for basic organization. The default PowerShell title of Administrator: C:\WINDOWS\system32\WindowsPowerShell\v1.0\powershell.exe can be really useless. So how do we rename the window to something more useful?

PS C:\> (Get-Host).UI.RawUI.WindowTitle = "Shell to Take over the World"
Boom! Now we have a window that is distinct from our other windows, and clearly displays its use for world domination. So how does the command work?

Get-Host returns an object that represents the host. By accessing the UI, RawUI, and WindowTitle property hierarchy we can modify the title. Not straight-forward, but rather simple. As for the actual plans to take over the world, those aren't simple, nor are they for sale.

And in the red trunks, Hal is undisputedly heavy

Oh sure, namby-pamby Powershell can have an elegant API for changing the window title, but in Unix we prefer things a little more raw:

$echo -e "\e]0;im in ur windoz, changin ur titlz\a" Yep, that's the highly intuitive sequence "<Esc>-right bracket-zero-semicolon-<title>-<BEL>" to set your window title to "<title>". Since this obviously doesn't roll trippingly off the fingers, I generally create the following shell function in my .bashrc: function ct { echo -e "\e]0;$*\a"; }

See the "$*" in the middle of all the line noise? That takes all of the "arguments" to the function (anything we type on the command line after the function name, "ct") and uses them as the title for your window. So now you can change titles in your windows by typing: $ ct im in ur windoz, changin ur titlz

And that's a whole lot nicer.

Another cool place to use this escape sequence is in your shell prompt. Yes, I know we've done several Episodes at this point that deal with wacky shell prompt games, but this is a fun hack:

$export PS1='\e]0;\u@\h:$PWD\a\h\$'elk$

Here we've embedded our title-setting escape sequence into the PS1 variable that sets up our command-line prompt. We're using it to set the window title to "\u@\h: $PWD", where \u is expanded by the shell as our username, \h is the unqualified hostname, and$PWD is our current working directory. So now we can easily look at the window titles and know exactly who and where we are. This is useful for picking out the one window we want if we have a stack of minimized terminal windows. Notice we also have "\h\$" after the escape sequence which will actually set the visible shell prompt we see in our terminal window. Whee! Mike Cardosa slips something a little extra into his gloves, cmd.exe Only a true Unix guy would use the word "elegant" to describe the PowerShell method for setting the window title. I do not think that word means what you think that it means. It turns out that the cmd.exe developers failed to achieve the level of obscurity that we've come to expect when dealing with this humble shell. Ladies and gentlemen, introducing quite possibly the most intuitive command available in cmd.exe: C:\> title h@xor at work That's it! We've managed to change the window title using the simple 'title' command. Just feed it any string you'd like and you are good to go. Including environment variables is also startlingly simple: C:\> title netcat listener on %computername% Look at that. The window title - including environment variable - is set without using a single cryptic command line switch or for loop. Fortunately for sys admins (and certain bloggers), this sort of simplicity is the exception rather than the rule, so the world still needs those with a mastery of obscure commands. ## Tuesday, August 24, 2010 ### Episode #109: The$PATH Less Taken

Hal is in a reflective mood:

I was perusing SHELLdorado the other day and came across a tip from glong-at-openwave-dot-com for printing the elements of your $PATH with each directory on a separate line: $ IFS=':'; for i in $PATH; do echo$i; done/bin/usr/bin/usr/X11R6/bin/usr/local/bin/sbin/usr/sbin/usr/local/sbin/usr/games/home/hal/bin

It's an interesting example of using IFS to break up your input on something other than whitespace, but in this particular case there are obviously more terse ways to accomplish the same thing:

$echo$PATH | sed 's/:/\n/g'/bin/usr/bin/usr/X11R6/bin/usr/local/bin/sbin/usr/sbin/usr/local/sbin/usr/games/home/hal/bin

Or to be even more terse:

$echo$PATH | tr : \\n/bin...

The important piece of advice here is that if you're just exchanging one character for another (or even one set of characters for another), then tr is probably the quickest way for you to accomplish your mission. sed is obviously a superset of this functionality, but you have to use a more complex operator to do the same thing.

I think this example also nicely brings home the fact that both sed and tr (as well as awk and many other Unix input-processing primitives) are implicit loops over their input. The for loop from the first example has been subsumed by the functionality of sed and tr, but you still pay the performance cost of reading the entire input. So if you have a multi-stage pipeline that has several sed, tr, and/or awk commands in it, you might try to look at ways to combine operations in order to reduce the number of times you have to read your input.

In PowerShell we can do the same thing, and just as easily.

PS C:\> $env:path -replace ";","n"C:\WINDOWS\system32C:\WINDOWSC:\WINDOWS\System32\WbemC:\WINDOWS\system32\WindowsPowerShell\v1.0 Just as the registry and the filesystem have a provider, environment variables have their own too. The providers allow PowerShell to access the objects using a common set of cmdlets, like Get-ChildItem (alias gci, ls, and dir). Just as we can list the contents of a drive by typing gci c: we can list all the environment variables with gci env:. To access a specific variable we use$env: followed by the variable name.

PS C:\> $env:pathC:\WINDOWS\system32;C:\WINDOWS;C:\WINDOWS\System32\Wbem;C:\WINDOWS\system32\WindowsPowerShell\v1.0 Once we get the variable's value, we just replace the semicolon with the new line character (n) by using the replace operator. Bonus! Guest CMD.EXE solution: We've all been missing Ed's CMD.EXE wisdom, but loyal reader Vince has moved in before the body is even cold and sent us this little tidbit: C:\> for %i in ("%PATH:;=" "%") do @echo %i"C:\Program Files\Perl\site\bin""C:\Program Files\Perl\bin""C:\WINDOWS\system32""C:\WINDOWS" Thanks, Vince! ## Tuesday, August 17, 2010 ### Episode #108: Acess List Listing Hal's turn in the mailbag Loyal reader Rick Miner sent us an interesting challenge recently. He's got several dozen Cisco IOS and PIX configuration files containing access-list rules. He'd like to have an easy way to audit the access-lists across all the files and see which rules are common to all files and where rules might be missing from some files. Basically we're looking through the files for lines that start with "access-list", like this one: access-list 1 deny any log However, access-lists can also contain comment lines (indicated by the keyword "remark"), and we don't care about these: access-list 1 remark This is a comment We also want to be careful to ignore any extra spaces that may have been introduced for readability. So the following two lines should be treated as the same: access-list 1 deny any logaccess-list 1 deny any log Rick sent us a sample access-list, which he'd sanitized with generic IP addresses, etc. I created a directory with a few slightly modified versions of his original sample-- giving me 5 different files to test with. Now I love challenges like this, because they always allow me to construct some really fun pipelines. Here's my solution: $ grep -h ^access-list rules0* | grep -v remark | sed 's/  */ /g' |     sort | uniq -c | sort -nr      5 access-list 4 permit any...      4 access-list 1 deny any log...

First I use grep to pull the access-list lines out of my sample files (named rules01, rules02, ...). Normally when you run grep against multiple files it will prepend the file name to each matching line, but I don't want that because I plan on feeding the output to sort and uniq later. So I use the "-h" option with grep to suppress the file names.

Next we have a little cleanup action. I use a second grep command to strip out all the "remark" lines. The output then goes to sed to replace instances of multiple spaces with a single space. Note that the sed substitution is "s/<space><space>*/<space>/g", though it's a little difficult to read in this format.

Finally we have to process our output to answer Rick's question. We sort the lines and then use "uniq -c" to count the number of occurrences of each rule. The second sort gives us a descending numeric sort the lines using the number of instances of each rule as the sort criteria. Since I'm working with five sample files, rules like "access-list 4 permit any" must appear in each file (assuming no duplicate rules, which seems unlikely). On the other hand, "access-list 1 deny any log" appears to be missing from one file.

But which file is our rule missing from? One way to answer this question is to look for the files where the rule is present:

$grep -l 'access-list 1 deny any log' rules0*' Wait a minute! What just happened here? We should have gotten four matching files! Well remember how we canonicalized the lines by converting multiple spaces to a single space? Let's try making our rule a bit more flexible: $ grep -l 'access-list *1 *deny *any *log' rules0*'rules01rules02rules03rules05

That's better! We use the stars to match any number of spaces and we find our rules. "grep -l" (that's an "el" not a "one") means just display the matching file names and not the matching lines so that we can easily see that "rules04" is the file missing the rule.

But what if you were Rick with dozens of files to sort through. It wouldn't necessarily be clear which files weren't included in the output from our grep command. It would be nicer if we could output the names of the files that were missing the rule, rather than listing the files that included the rule. Easier done than said:

$sort <(ls) <(grep -l 'access-list *1 *deny *any *log' rules0*) | uniq -urules04 "<(...)" is an output substitution that allows you to insert the output of a command in a spot where you would normally expect to use a filename. Here I'm using sort to merge the output of ls, which gives me a list of all files in the directory, with our previous command for selecting the files that contain the rule we're interested in. "uniq -u" gives you the lines that only appear once in the output (the unique lines). Of course these are the files that appear in the ls output but which are not matched by our grep expression, and thus they're the files that don't contain the rule that we're looking for. And that's the answer we wanted. You can do so much with sort and uniq on the Unix command line. They're some of my absolute favorite utilities. I've laid off the sort and uniq action because Windows CMD.EXE didn't have anything like them and it always made Ed grumpy when I pulled them out of my tool chest. But now that we've murdered Ed and buried him in a shallow grave out backbid farewell to Ed, I get to bring out more of my favorites. Still, I fear this may be another one of those "character building" Episodes for Tim. Let's watch, shall we? Tim's got plenty of character: Alright Hal, you used to push Ed around, but you are going to have a slightly tougher time pushing me around. And not just because I wear sticky shoes. This is going to be easy. Ready to watch, Hal? PS C:\> ls rules* | ? { -not (Select-String "access-list *1 *deny *any *log"$_) }    Directory: C:\tempMode                LastWriteTime     Length Name----                -------------     ------ -----a---         8/16/2010   9:44 PM       1409 rules05.txt
Files whose name begin with "rules" are piped into our filter. The Where-Object filter (alias ?) uses a logical Not in conjunction with Select-String to find files that do not contain our search string. The search string used is the same as that used by Hal.

Now to crank it up a few notches...

But what if we have a file containing our gold standard, and we wanted to compare it against all of our config files to find ones that don't comply with our standard. Your wish is my command (unless your with involves a water buffalo, a nine iron, and some peanut butter).

PS C:\> cat gold.txt | select-string -NotMatch '^ *$' | % {$_ -replace "\s+", "\s+" } | % {  $a =$_;  ls rules* | ? { -not (select-string $a$_) }} | get-unique    Directory: C:\tempMode                LastWriteTime     Length Name----                -------------     ------ -----a---         8/16/2010   9:44 PM       1409 rules02.txt-a---         8/16/2010   9:44 PM       1337 rules05.txt
In the command above, the first line of our command gets each non-blank line of our gold config, and changes and spaces into \s+ for use in our search string. The \s+ is the regular expression equivalent of "one or more spaces". Now that we have generated our search string, lets search each file like we did earlier. Finally, we use the Get-Unique cmdlet to remove duplicates.

Hal, you may have buried Ed, but you haven't killed me off...yet.

## Tuesday, August 10, 2010

### Episode #107: Email for Natural File Enhancement

Tim pretends he is Cliff Claven:

Another dive into the mailbag this week. Jonathon English writes in asking how to find files that are larger than 10Mb, determine the owner, and send him/her an email.

Let's start off with the easy part, getting the owner of files bigger than 10MB.

PS C:\> ls -r | ? { $_.Length -ge 10485760 } | get-acl | select path, ownerPath Owner---- -----Microsoft.PowerShell.Core\FileSystem::C:\bigfile.txt DOMAIN\user1Microsoft.PowerShell.Core\FileSystem::C:\biggerfile.txt DOMAIN\user2Microsoft.PowerShell.Core\FileSystem::C:\biggestfile.txt DOMAIN\user3 The command starts off with the Get-ChildObject (Alias dir, ls). The -r[ecurse] option is used to search all subdirectories. Files are filtered with Where-Object cmdlet (alias ?) to return only files that are 10MB or larger. The results are piped into Get-Acl, which gets the owner. Finally, the attributes owner and path are selected. As you may notice, the path looks a little funny. The Get-Acl cmdlet works with multiple providers, and the path returned by the cmdlet includes the provider. The path is a bit ugly, so it would be good to clean it up - but how?" There are a few ways to do it. Here is the easiest and the quickest. PC C:\> ls -r | ? {$_.Length -ge 10485760 } |  select FullName, @{Name="Owner";Expression={(Get-Acl $_).owner }}FullName Owner-------- -----C:\bigfile.txt DOMAIN\user1C:\biggerfile.txt DOMAIN\user2C:\biggestfile.txt DOMAIN\user3 Here the Select-Object cmdlet (alias select) is used with a calculated property to get the file's owner. So we have the info, now to email it. Some of this will depend on the security settings used by your mail server(s) and you may have to customize this yourself. Also, we may cross into scriptland and violate rule #1. Ed isn't around, so no one tell him. PS C:\>$SmtpClient = new-object system.net.mail.smtpClientPS C:\> $SmtpClient.Host = "smtpserver.domain.com"PS C:\> ls -r | ? {$_.Length -ge 10485760 } | select FullName, @{Name="Owner";Expression={(Get-Acl $_).owner } } | % {$MailMessage = New-Object system.net.mail.mailmessage  $mailmessage.from = "big brother"$mailmessage.To.add($_.Owner -replace "DOMAIN\","" + "mydomain.com")$mailmessage.Subject = "Your big file won't copy"  $mailmessage.IsBodyHtml = 1$mailmessage.Body = "This file is too big and won't be copied:" + $_.Path$smtpclient.Credentials = [System.Net.CredentialCache]::DefaultNetworkCredentials  $smtpclient.Send($mailmessage)}
These are the same commands as used above. The only difference is we have ported some .NET code to send the email. In the code above, I assumed that the username was part of the email address or alias. If that isn't the case, we would have to lookup the user's email address. To easily lookup the email address we would need the Exchange snap-in. (Ok, not a default install, but pretty common. And if I am going to violate one rule, I may as well break them all).

PS C:\> Get-User tim | select WindowsEmailAddressWindowsEmailAddress-------------------Tim.Medin@commandlinekungfu.com
Here is the rewritten command using the Exchange cmdlet.

PS C:\> ls -r \\sharepoint\data\it\general | ? { $_.Length -ge 10485760 } | select FullName, @{Name="Owner";Expression={(Get-User (Get-Acl$_).owner).WindowsEmailAddress } }FullName            Owner--------            -----C:\bigfile.txt      user1@domain.comC:\biggerfile.txt   user2@domain.comC:\biggestfile.txt  user3@domain.com
Here is how it would look with our...ahem...script...

PS C:\> $SmtpClient = new-object system.net.mail.smtpClientPS C:\>$SmtpClient.Host = "smtpserver.domain.com"PS C:\> ls -r \\sharepoint\data\it\general | ? { $_.Length -ge 10485760 } | select FullName, @{Name="Owner";Expression={(Get-User (Get-Acl$_).owner).WindowsEmailAddress } } % {  $MailMessage = New-Object system.net.mail.mailmessage$mailmessage.from = "big brother"  $mailmessage.To.add($_.Owner)  $mailmessage.Subject = "Your big file won't copy"$mailmessage.IsBodyHtml = 1  $mailmessage.Body = "This file is too big and won't be copied:" +$_.Path  $smtpclient.Credentials = [System.Net.CredentialCache]::DefaultNetworkCredentials$smtpclient.Send($mailmessage)} So that is how it looks. Let's see if Hal is manly enough to bend some rules. Hal thinks hard Wait, the guy who brought up "Natural Enhancement" is questioning my manhood? Hey, sport, in Unix-land we can actually send email from the command line without resorting to writing a script. Actually, I did end up relaxing one of my own personal rules for this week's Episode. Generally I try very hard to come up with a solution that's a single command-line. It may be a really long pipeline and spawn lots of subshells, but you should only have to hit the "Go" button once. But this time, it was frankly easier to come up with a clear solution that uses two primary command lines. Sue me. First is the task of identifying large files and sorting them by user. I'm going to do this work in a temporary directory just to make my life easier: # mkdir /tmp/emails# cd /tmp/emails# find / -size +10000000 -ls | awk '{ print$5, $0 }' | while read user line; do echo$line >>$user; done The find command uses the same expression we saw back in Episode 102-- find all files whose size is greater than 10,000,000 (bytes by default). I've added the "-ls" action so that instead of just the file names we get a detailed listing ala "ls -dils". This output gets piped into awk, where I pull out the username in field number five and re-output the line with the username duplicated at the front of the line. The modified lines then go into the while loop where I pull the username off the front of each line and append the remainder of the line (the "find ... -ls" output) to a file named for the user. So at the end of the command, I've got the detailed listing information for all the big files on the system broken out into separate files by user. That's actually the hard part. Sending email to the users is easy (assuming outgoing email on your machine is configured properly): # for user in *; do cat$user | mailx -s 'Large File Report' $user; done All we need to do is shove the contents of each file into the standard input of a mailx process with the username specified as the recipient. The "-s" option even lets us specify a subject line for the message. Note that I used "cat ... | mailx ..." here rather than "mailx ... <$user" because I wanted to make it easier to add a canned message to the top of the report in addition to the find output. For example, if you had the boilerplate in /tmp/mymsg, then you would use a command line like:

# for user in *; do cat /tmp/mymsg $user | mailx -s 'Large File Report'$user; done

I actually am feeling a little... well let's just say "impotent"... for having to do this in two commands. There's probably some crazy output redirection stunt I could have done to pack this into a single command line, but my solution accomplishes the task and is straightforward to type and understand.

If anybody feels man enough to accept the challenge of coming up with a single command version, mail your answers to suggestions[at]commandlinekungfu[dot]com. I will choose the "best" solutions using some completely arbitrary set of criteria that I haven't developed yet and post them here on the blog. Prizes will probably not be awarded.

## Tuesday, August 3, 2010

### Episode #106: Epoch FAIL!

Hal goes to camp:

I recently had the opportunity to teach at the US Cyber Challenge Camp. The campers were awesome and we had tons of geeky fun.

Among other topics, I covered securing Linux systems, including some work with SELinux. One of the problems you run into when dealing with SELinux is reading the SELinux-related messages in the system audit.log file. Here's a sample entry:

# egrep '^type=(AVC|SELINUX)' /var/log/audit/audit.log | tail -1type=AVC msg=audit(1279670222.302:199): avc:  denied  { name_bind } for  pid=18232 comm="httpd"src=31337 scontext=user_u:system_r:httpd_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:port_t:s0 tclass=tcp_socket

The audit.log files live under /var/log/audit, and the SELinux entries start with either "type=AVC" or "type=SELINUX". I use "tail -1" above to pull out just the last line of output.

The first thing you might notice is that, unlike most Unix log files, the audit.log lines don't appear to contain a timestamp. In fact, there is a timestamp on each line-- it's just in Unix epoch time, or seconds since Jan 1, 1970. The big number inside the "msg=audit(...)" section is the epoch time value (so "1279670222" in the example above). Back in Episode #77, Adrian Shaw showed us how to convert this value into a human-readable timestamp:

# date -d @1279670222Tue Jul 20 16:57:02 PDT 2010

One of the campers challenged me to come up with some Command-Line Kung Fu to automatically translate the epoch time values and rewrite each line with the human-readable time format at the beginning of the line. It took me a little while to figure out a solution, but I eventually ended up with:

# egrep '^type=(AVC|SELINUX)' /var/log/audit/audit.log |  while read line; do     time=echo $line | sed 's/.*audit($$[0-9]*$$.*/\1/'; echo date -d @$time $line; done[...]Tue Jul 20 16:57:02 PDT 2010 type=AVC msg=audit(1279670222.302:199): avc: denied { name_bind }for pid=18232 comm="httpd" src=31337 scontext=user_u:system_r:httpd_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:port_t:s0 tclass=tcp_socket I decided to use a while loop to read the input line-by-line because it gave me more flexibility to run multiple commands against each line. First I use sed to filter out the epoch time value and store it in the variable$time. The sed expression is a substitution. The LHS matches the entire line, but specifically matches the epoch time value as a sub-expression which we delimit with "$$...$$". Read the regex on the LHS as "any amount of stuff (.*'), then audit(' followed by zero or more digits ([0-9]*'), followed by a bunch more stuff (.*')". We replace everything we matched on the LHS with the epoch time value we matched in the subexpression ("\1"). Thus the output of the sed expression will be just the epoch time value.

Once we extract the epoch time value, we can call "date -d @$time". All we have to do at that point is output the result of the date command followed by the original input line which has been hanging out in$line all this time. Whee!

While this is really useful on Linux systems, there's no real equivalent in the Windows environment. But I sent Tim a copy of a Linux audit.log file to see what he could do with it in Powershell. This is a situation you might legitimately have to deal with if you were analyzing a Linux system using a Windows forensics tool. Let's see how good Tim's parsing skills are, shall we?

Tim pitches a tent:

I find it rather ironic that the Security Enhanced Linux's audit log seems to be lacking an enhancement that would be useful for auditing. Now, let's dive into some level 1 parsing!

PS C:\> Select-String "[0-9]{10}" audit.log | select @{Name="Epoch";  Expression={$_.Matches[0].Value}}, line | flEpoch : 1279670222Line : type=AVC msg=audit(1279670222.302:199): avc: denied { name_bind } for pid=18232 comm="httpd" src= 31337 scontext=user_u:system_r: httpd_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:port_t:s0 tclass=tcp_socket We start off using Select-String to both read the file and find the epoch timestamp. The results are piped into Select-Object (alias select), which is used to display the line as well as create a new epoch property. There are now two properties, the epoch stamp and the line. Let's crank it up a notch and reformat the timestamp. Get ready for level 2 parsing! PS C:\> Select-String "[0-9]{10}" audit.log | select @{Name="TimeStamp"; Expression={(Get-Date 1/1/1970).AddSeconds($_.Matches[0].Value)}}, line | flTimeStamp : 7/20/2010 11:57:02 PMLine      : type=AVC msg=audit(1279670222.302:199): avc: denied { name_bind } for            pid=18232 comm="httpd" src=31337 scontext=user_u:system_r:            httpd_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:port_t:s0 tclass=tcp_socket
In Level 2, we do the same thing as Level 1, except we reformat the timestamp. How do we rewrite the timestamp? Epoch time is just the number of seconds since 1/1/1970. So all we need to do is the math.

(Get-Date 1/1/1970).AddSeconds($_.Matches[0].Value) Ok, so we have the results we are looking for, and we could leave it here. But Hal filtered for lines containing AVC or SELINUX, and we can't let Hal beat us. Get ready for Level 3! PS C:\> Select-String "[0-9]{10}" audit.log | select @{Name="TimeStamp"; Expression={(Get-Date 1/1/1970).AddSeconds($_.Matches[0].Value)}}, line |  ? { $_.Line -match "type=(AVC|SELINUX)" } Nothing fancy here, just added filtering. One minor problem, Select-String is being used for parsing and then the line is searched again by the Where-Object (alias ?) filter. The redundant searching will slow things down, so let's speed it up. Get ready for Level 4! PS C:\> Select-String "type=(AVC|SELINUX) msg=audit\(([0-9]+)" audit.log | select @{Name="TimeStamp"; Expression={(Get-Date 1/1/1970).AddSeconds($_.Matches[0].Groups[2].Value)}}, line
The regular expression is juiced up to do the filtering and find the timestamp. The juiced regex returns multiple groups and must be accesses differently (as shown above).

Group 0: type=AVC msg=audit(1279670222Group 1: AVCGroup 2: 1279670222
That is how you parse the audit.log with PowerShell. I hope it wasn't too painful parsing my parsing.