Logger a la Key

[uberwalla]

is it actually possible to make a keylogger in turing? well one that does not need to have a run window lol

[TokenHerbz]

whats a keylogger??? And yes, Turing can run code without a window, a window is only there to show you output of the code you've created.

var number : int := 0
for i: 1 .. 100
number := i
end for

That runs without a window!

[Prince Pwn]

You cannot read keystrokes without showing the window, tried it before. Window.Hide does no good here.

[uberwalla]

damn that sucks. so is it only vb and c that can really do this?

[Hackmaster]

there has to be a way... if you browse the applications... someone made a virus using turing, and it was a keylogger, and it ran just fine in the backround. I'm not sure how he did it, and i've never tried anything like it before.

maybe, ignoring Prince Pwn for a second, you could do a noecho on a setscreen, and have the window hide. now, if it kept on popping up as you typed, you could close it everytime you did your getch, or however you would record the keys.

or, hell, just do a window.Close! maybe if you killed the window it would work...?

[TokenHerbz]

i think Window.Close termanates (incorecly at that) the program. I'm not sure if you could start it up again, Iv'e never tried.

[ericfourfour]

Hackmaster wrote:

maybe, ignoring Prince Pwn for a second, you could do a noecho on a setscreen, and have the window hide. now, if it kept on popping up as you typed, you could close it everytime you did your getch, or however you would record the keys.

or, hell, just do a window.Close! maybe if you killed the window it would work...?

Sorry, it is impossible. The closest thing you could get away with is putting the window as low on the screen as possible.

Even try these test cases:

code:

View.Set ("noecho") Window.Hide (-1) var chars : array char of boolean Input.KeyDown (chars) % var text : string % get text % var ch : string (1) % Input.getch (ch) % var ch : char % ch := Input.getchar ()

uberwalla wrote:

is it only vb and c that can really do this?

Actually, pretty much every other language can get input without a window.

[Hackmaster]

hey, eric, that's actually a good idea!

uber... try this:

code:

setscreen("graphics:1;1,noecho, nobuttonbar")

then window would be soo small, you may not notice...

[uberwalla]

doesn't turing have a set window size you must have? i swear it does i doint think you can get 1,1 but ill try

[Tony]

There is some minimum to the window size, just enough to fit in the _[]X buttons, and maybe then some.

Though I think Turing's window might actually have to be in focus to read the keys (could anyone confirm?)... possibly not with Input.KeyDown (that's always your best bet).

What other languages can do is to read the input buffer and send it back to the system as if nothing has happened. I've actually heard of pure hardware implemintations of keyloggers, that just attach to your keyboard cord in the back of your computer. Scary.

[ericfourfour]

Tony wrote:

possibly not with Input.KeyDown (that's always your best bet).

It has been proven to not work. Look up a few posts at the test cases.

Tony wrote:

What other languages can do is to read the input buffer and send it back to the system as if nothing has happened. I've actually heard of pure hardware implemintations of keyloggers, that just attach to your keyboard cord in the back of your computer. Scary.

I guess they are scary... until you take them off ofcourse.

[Tony]

yeah, but how often do you check behind your case to see if anything has been attached to one of the ports? I bet that with a blue-tooth the signal could be send and recorded remotely, so it doesn't even need to be retrieved to get your info.

[ericfourfour]

Oh I see what you are saying. Someone can put it there without you knowing. That would suck and there would be no way to detect it until you go behind your computer.

[Hackmaster]

Well... I don't know... it might even be detectable.. your keyboard cable might have some feeling of being wheigthed down.... or... your.. um ... bluetooth... might be slower? maybe? a bit of a delay?