Le 29/08/2017 à 21:34, Michael Mann via Wireshark-dev a écrit :
The answer depends on exactly what you are trying to do, some things
will be easier than others.
1. If you want to add vendor specific objects, that can easily be done
in Lua because there is a dissector table that you can just register
your vendor specific class with ("cip.class.iface"). There should be
numerous examples of Lua using a dissector table (just not specifically
for CIP).
I have to admit the way dissector tables work is not clear for me.
I registered my dissector for a vendor-specific class, and I observed
the following behaviour:
- When the service is common (Get_Attribute_List for example), the
dissector is not called.
- when the service is vendor-specific, the dissector is then called.
So I can implement the vendor-specific services for vendor-specific
classes at least, with a new dissector.
But I don't understand why discriminate dissector in the class dissector
table based on the service being known or not, any idea why it was
implemented this way?
Since the service is parsed and interpreted before the path (so the
class), wouldn't it make more sense to actually make a dissector table
based on the service?
2. There is no support currently for "classless" service codes (like
those used in Rockwell Automation PLCs), which is what
_https://www.wireshark.org/lists/ethereal-dev/200601/msg00174.html_ appears
to be talking about.
As I understand it the service codes mentioned in that thread are class
specific.
I have never encountered "classless" service codes until now, I didn't
even know that existed (as CIP doesn't implement this behaviour, or at
least I couldn't find it in the documentation).
2. If you want to add vendor specific services to already supported
objects, that would be more difficult to do in Lua because there isn't a
dissector table hook for them. I'm not sure there would be a way to
handle the "general" case of registering service + class into a
dissector table, but you could add dissector tables (patching
packet-cip.c) for specific objects (Identity, ConnectionManager, etc)
and submit just that part as a patch for inclusion in base Wireshark code.
Re
3. Vendor specific attributes of an object would have the same
difficulty in Lua and would need dissector tables.
Well, there is the cip.data_segment.iface dissector table, but then one
would need to check (in every dissector register in this table) the
class code, and also the instance id (to determine if it is a class
attribute or an instance attribute).
I'm not sure how this dissector table is used though: is it only for
attribute data or also service data?
4. I believe Lua will "override" any value registered to a dissector
table, so you could write the "vendor specific" portion, for say the
Identity object, but then you'd have to duplicate all of the dissection
currently being done for it in your Lua script.
I did test with setting a lua dissector for Identity in the
cip.class.iface, and on packets with common services it wasn't triggered
(I didn't have packets with vendor-specific services call for Identity).
So apparently it does not override the default dissector with the lua
one (at least with a common service).
5. Also note that not all "open" objects are supported in
packet-cip.c. It would be appreciated that if you added dissection for
any of those, that you provide a patch for integration here:
https://code.wireshark.org/review (see
https://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/SubmittingPatches for more
details). If you're more familiar with Lua than C, you can put the Lua
script here: https://wiki.wireshark.org/Contrib, but I'd probably end up
taking it and converting it to C.
If I encounter those I can implement it (in C or lua, both are fine for
me), but it is not my priority for now.
The problem I see here is that the system of dissector table does not
fit our needs in this context.
Ideally I would see one custom dissector just for the service and path
(so service, classes and instances), and one for the payload (attributes
and services data).
All the structure would be made in C, and just small portions of lua
would need to be used to (dynamically) provide names for classes,
services and attributes. Then, a bigger lua script would provide a full
dissector for the payload (attributes or services data), based on the
previously parsed informations.
How I have no idea if this is possible in wireshark, any thoughts?
