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

Error opening items inside an E01 from an unmounted READ ONLY Windows network share #1782

Closed
wladimirleite opened this issue Jul 22, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1790
Closed
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@wladimirleite
Copy link
Member

wladimirleite commented Jul 22, 2023

It seems that #1407 didn't fully solve #1336 when the network share is read only (which is the usual case here).
This was reported to me by a user.
I thought I tested this situation (read only) when implementing #1407, but it is not working anymore.
I will investigate it in more detail, but I was able to reproduce it today using 4.1.3 and 4.0.7 in a small test case with an E01 image.
It looks like the issue is related to TSK, as it doesn't happen with other evidence types (folders, UFDRs etc).
If the case is in a writeable network share or it is mapped to a letter (i.e. instead of opening from \\server\folder, use X:\mapfolder), then it works fine.

@wladimirleite
Copy link
Member Author

After struggling during this week, I think I finally found the cause (and a possible solution) of this issue.
I will run some tests (in different scenarios, read-only/read-write and mapped/unmapped network location) and will post more details (and hopefully submit a PR) later.

@wladimirleite
Copy link
Member Author

Under certain conditions (like sleuth.db is in an unmapped network read-only folder) IPED creates a copy of sleuth.db in the temporary folder and updates evidence location (to use absolute path). This was already implemented and seems to be working fine. However, when accessing the content of an item inside an evidence handled by the sleuth kit (e.g. E01), it uses the original database, which causes an odd exception.

@lfcnassif
Copy link
Member

Thank you very much @tc-wleite for spending your time investigating this! Should have taken a while... I will merge the fix shortly.

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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants