World's Smallest Functional Keylogger Project 3,584 Bytes Small 3.5k

This Project is now a Featured Article on RootKit.com :-)

The Programs and Files included are Copyright 2005, by ZOverLord, All Rights Reserved

This is a Proof Of Concept for Educational Purposes ONLY!

Notes:

This program is 3.5K small, as in 3,584 bytes and can do ANYTHING other Key-Loggers claim, this is Version 1.0, a Stealth version will be next to show Hiding concepts.

The program was created because MANY people claimed that you could NOT use a Stand-Alone program ("Without the Global hook procedure being located in a DLL") to do
low-level keyboard Key-Logging. As I say.....

"We Don't NEED NO STINKIN DLL!"

The Goals of this project were:

1. Keep it Small.
2. Minimize as much as possible, CPU overhead.
3. Make sure only ONE copy per user can run but support fast user switching.
4. Allow logging files on a per user basis.
5. Provide as much information as possible of WHERE the key strokes came from.
6. Allow this to be installed and run using a non ADMIN account.
7. Don't place the Global Low-Level Hook procedure in a .dll.
8. Allow a Hot Key combination to stop it.
9. Show others for educational purposes how it was done.

Download the Entire Project Including Source, Pre-Complied Example, Build File and Documentation Here:

http://testing.onlytherightanswers.c...article&sid=33

Check this keylogger out



Chota Worlds Smallest Keylogger


Win32 PE File
Win 98 Only

Actual Code Size = 62 Bytes
Header Size = 512 Bytes \ Essential Parts Of
Import Table = 106 Bytes / PE File.. :(
---
Total Size = 680 Bytes

http://www.infogreg.com/source-code/...keylogger.html

The Key here is the word "FUNCTIONAL!"

Using that code:

1. What was the Computer Named that Entered the Keystrokes?
2. What was the Domain Name of the Domain the computer was on?
3. What was the User name on the computer that entered the keys?
4. What date were those keystrokes entered?
5. What time were those keystrokes entered?
6. What application did the keystrokes come from?
7. What was the Window Title of where the Keystrokes came from?
8. What was the Windows Class of the program that handled the keys?
9. Can more than ONE copy be accidentally started?
10. What Hot-Key Can stop the program?

ALL of the above information and or functions cannot be done by your example. Additionally, the program you link to also states it is VERY VERY CPU intensive.

Yet ALL the above are done with this, and with minimum CPU overhead.

This is WHY this is called The World's Smallest Functional KeyLogger

ZOverLord nice work.

Quote:

---

Become a MEMBER and DOWNLOAD It NOW!...

---

While your work seems to be legit, I always question the "register now" approach to getting free code. It makes you look like just another internet huckster and that may be the farthest thing from the truth. None the less, it is what it is - an advertisement to drum up registration on a website. Small keyloggers aren't exactly hard to come by these days. ;)

--Th13

Well, I call it source code control, if someone wants it bad enough, it should be NO big deal to register to get it.

Well I can see why you, as the code author, might want to know who is grabbing copies of the code. However, you can't validate who is actually getting their hands on the code using a simple web registration process.

This is one of the reasons I question the approach. Many great open source sites (such as sourceforge.net) do not require registration and they have many keylogger projects which are of excellent quality.

So this brings me back to thinking about why one would require registration for open source code. I'm not sure how this process controls your source code. Once I have it, I can throw it on my own site and serve it up to the world.

Again, I'm not trying to accuse you of anything but personally I never feel the need to register for open source code.

Just one man's opinion.


--TH13

I agree with thehorse13 I do all my opensource development in a publicly accessable (subversion) repository..
Anyone can read.. and only a limited number of developers have write access to the repo..

Choosing a propper licence is better then just popping up arbitrary obstacles that will stop more legitimate people looking then scriptkiddies stealing..

But to each his own..

Well, if you notice, I state in the download area, that they agree to terms before they download it.

Also, this is a work in progress, the first stage is SMALL, no Stealth, the Second is HIDING, the Third EMAIL and or FTP.

I really don't want to open up my download area to the public, and this allows me if needed to inform people when stage 2 is done, and so on.

I really don't want to go from site to site, where after 24 hours I can't UPDATE an original post, or I need to upload here and there.

So, it makes more sense to do it this way.

Some may not agree, but hey, it allows people to be informed of new versions.

Quote:

---

Well, if you notice, I state in the download area, that they agree to terms before they download it.

---

Well, I see this:

Quote:

---

You will receive a confirmation email with a link to a page you should visit to activate your account in the next 24 hours.

Notice: Account preferences are cookie based.
As a registered user you can:

Post comments with your name
Send news with your name
Have a personal box in the Home
Select how many news you want in the Home
Customize the comments
Select different themes
Access to Downloads
Access to Members List
Access to Search
Access to Statistics
Access to Top 10
Access to User's Custom Box
Create your own Journal
Read custom headlines
some other cool stuff...
Register Now! It's Free!
We don't sell/give to others your personal info.

---

Items in bold raise my eyebrow given your explanation of why one must register. Also, for true open source code, I expect to see nothing other than a reference to the GNU GPL.

SourceForge.net (and others) have a listserv that you can subscribe to so that when updates are available, an e-mail notice goes out to all that are registered to the project.

So as I ask more and more questions, and after reading the post title as more of an advertisement than a project announcement, I have to say that I feel that my instincts may be correct on this one.

--TH13

Source is available, BUT.....nobody said it is GNU. It has a copyright statement.

Secondly, we don't give ANY user data of ANY kind to ANY third party period, so why not be honest about that.

This is NOT TRUE OPEN SOURCE! I made the source available, however I wish to continue to hold the copyright, there are MANY reasons for this, but that's not even important.

Well, I guess I've made my points and so have you. No use going on about it. Good luck with your project.

--Th13

Thanks

Hope the concept of registering and asked to agree to terms of use, is not that much of a turn off.

If so, you can always go to RootKit.com and copy the main source, lib source and build file form the pages there and create the project that way, it's the current featured article there.