Replies: 2 comments 3 replies
-
|
Such exports aren't that common. You can find them in DUI dlls, but I didn't see such exports in any other Windows dll. Most other usages of symbol hooks are cases where the functions aren't exported in any way. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
Would it be safe to just try to hook |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
3 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Would not it be better to avoid the need for symbols downloads (which are not available for insider builds, for instance) by allowing to hook a function by its decorated/mangled name, with an important addition that this name would be authomatically modified by the hooking utility according to the current architecture?
For instance, if I am hooking a function
?SetXML@DUIXmlParser@DirectUI@@QEAAJPEBGPEAUHINSTANCE__@@1@Z:It would work only on x64 and ARM. If I want it to work also on x86, I also have to hook the function
?SetXML@DUIXmlParser@DirectUI@@QAAJPBGPAUHINSTANCE__@@1@Z. Would not it be more handy, if the hooking utility automatically modified the function's name for the current architecture, so that neither multiple attempts nor downloading symbols would be needed?Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions