November 2020 - stunnel-users

Requests to cloud server that requires host header
by Lorne Kates 13 Nov '24

13 Nov '24

(related to Akamai message from before-- but I have better troubleshooting information). I'm tying to route traffic through stunnel to a "cloud" based-endpoint. That endpoint has a static server name-- test.authorize.net. (This is the dev sandbox for auth.net) But if you do an nslookup on test.authorize.net, you'll get back a different servername and IP, because it's so wonderfully "cloud". Stunnel apparently tries to connect to the nslookup value. The server rejects the request because it can't route it back to test.authorize.net. I've tried adding "delay = yes" and "sni = test.authorize.net", but neither work. To see this in action, a simple setup with any accept, then connect to test.authorize.net:443 in client = yes mode. This is what a valid response looks like (13 -- give me the darn merchant ID in a POST): https://test.authorize.net/gateway/transact.dll This is what you'll get if you try to use stunnel (400 invalid url) : https://23.195.204.150/gateway/transact.dll So how can I get stunnel to send the proper Request Header (host: test.authorize.net) make sure it's using http/1.1, etc?

4 3

Re: [stunnel-users] CPU 100%
by Eric Eberhard 06 Nov '24

06 Nov '24

Long ago I had a server with a bad network card. Every once in a while it would spew uncontrollable bytes onto the network. If you open a stunnel connection and it does that this could very well be the problem. If it cheap, try changing the network card. If not, you should be able to look in your firewall/router and it will tell you who is sending what bytes to whomever. See if that machine is indeed streaming the bytes in massive quantities. If not, I would suspect your stunnel is getting stuck in it's own loop. There are a million reasons this can happen (well a few less than a million) - such as maybe a bad library in the FreeBSD or a bad choice in the Makefile - such as doing threads or something in a way your O/S does not like (I use threads=fork or whatever it is, instead of actual threading). You might tinker with some of the options that make the stunnel build and try different ones. Especially if stunnel was compiled on a different version of the O/S - could be differences in bytes in things and who knows what. That is all I can suggest beyond setting the debug level to 7 (I think is highest) and then watching the log file. Eric From: stunnel-users [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Murrey, Brian J. Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 10:57 AM To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org Subject: [stunnel-users] CPU 100% We are running stunnel 5.49 on FreeBSD 11.2 and we're running into a problem once in a while. CPU pegs at 100% when we get an stunnel connection from one of our external devices. This affects 100% of all cores and we can't even log in to console. To mitigate this temporarily, we have a script running in the background to watch when stunnel begins to spike and restarts the daemon. It doesn't happen 100% of the time, and so far I have been unable to distinguish what makes the connection do this to the CPU. Have any of you run in to this issue? Sincerely, Brian Murrey System Engineer II, IT Infrastructure _____ NOTICE: This message may contain privileged and confidential information and/or protected health information intended solely for the use of the named recipient and may be privileged or otherwise protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you should immediately notify the sender and delete this message. Do not disseminate, reproduce, or review this message or attachments if you are not the intended recipient. The sender or others may have legal rights restricting the dissemination of the information contained in this message and, as a result, remedies against you in the event of the improper dissemination of confidential information, trade secrets, personal information or privileged communications. This message is the work of the sender and does not necessarily reflect the position, views, or policies of TriMedx LLC or its affiliates. WARNING: The integrity and security of this message cannot be guaranteed and may contain or transmit a virus or other illicit code. Neither TriMedx LLC or its affiliates accept liability for any damage attributable to viruses or illicit code transmitted through this message or an attachment.

2 1

older browsers, stunnel and privoxy
by kovacs janos 04 Mar '24

04 Mar '24

sorry to bother, im trying to make older browsers be able to display TLS 1.1 and TLS 1.2 sites. i heard stunnel cant be configured to always forward to the current site address dynamically, thats why i would use privoxy. the browser is configured to send to: 127.0.0.1 443 stunnel config has this at the end: [Tunnel_in] client = yes accept = 127.0.0.1:443 connect = 127.0.0.1:8118 verifyChain = yes CAfile = ca-certs.pem checkHost = localhost 127.0.0.1:8118 is the privoxy address. this is what stunnel writes: LOG5[main]: Configuration successful LOG5[0]: Service [Tunnel_in] accepted connection from 127.0.0.1:3261 LOG5[0]: s_connect: connected 127.0.0.1:8118 LOG5[0]: Service [Tunnel_in] connected remote server from 127.0.0.1:3262 and the browser infinitely loads, and never loads anything or leaves the page. if i remove the last 3 lines, its the same just with this line added: LOG4[main]: Service [Tunnel_in] needs authentication to prevent MITM attacks but it doesnt give an error or anything. with a configuration like: [Tunnel_out] client = no accept = 127.0.0.1:443 connect = 127.0.0.1:8118 cert = stunnel.pem this is what it gives: LOG5[3]: Service [Tunnel_out] accepted connection from 127.0.0.1:3294 LOG3[3]: SSL_accept: 1407609B: error:1407609B:SSL routines:SSL23_GET_CLIENT_HELLO:https proxy request LOG5[3]: Connection reset: 0 byte(s) sent to TLS, 0 byte(s) sent to socket and browser gives a server not found error immediately. im not even sure if i should use client or server configuration in a case like this, but none of them works anyway. all i would need is for my browser to get the pages decrypted, or at least in less than TLS1.1. like how on newipnow.com i can access sites with any encryption, since they are sent to the browser without encryption. the browser just gives an "unencrypted tunnel" warning, which is how i found stunnel, and which is exactly what i need, just locally.

8 41

TPM based mutual tls authentication
by Nyiri, Gabor (Nokia - HU/Budapest) 07 Nov '23

07 Nov '23

Hi, Can you help me how to configure stunnel client to use TPM for mutual TLS authentication? I want to connect with mTLS to a remote server then make this connection available for localhost without mTLS. Thanks for your help in advance! Here is my configuration so far without TPM: debug = debug output = /tmp/stunnel.log foreground = yes [mtls_client] client = yes accept = 127.0.0.1:12019 sni = server-with-mtls.example.com checkHost = server-with-mtls.example.com connect = 1.2.3.4:443 verifyChain = yes CApath = /etc/ssl/certs/ cert = client.crt key = client.key Thanks & br, Gábor Nyíri,

2 1

Stunnel 4 failing to connect to gmail
by Asif Iqbal 11 Dec '20

11 Dec '20

I am faling to connect to gmail. Not sure what that bind error means. iqbala@ghar:~$ sudo stunnel4 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG7[3839:3083650736]: Snagged 64 random bytes from /home/iqbala/.rnd 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG7[3839:3083650736]: Wrote 1024 new random bytes to /home/iqbala/.rnd 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG7[3839:3083650736]: RAND_status claims sufficient entropy for the PRNG 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG7[3839:3083650736]: PRNG seeded successfully 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG7[3839:3083650736]: Certificate: /etc/stunnel/stunnel.pem 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG7[3839:3083650736]: Certificate loaded 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG7[3839:3083650736]: Key file: /etc/stunnel/stunnel.pem 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG7[3839:3083650736]: Private key loaded 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG7[3839:3083650736]: SSL context initialized for service ssmtp 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG5[3839:3083650736]: stunnel 4.22 on i486-pc-linux-gnu with OpenSSL 0.9.8g 19 Oct 2007 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG5[3839:3083650736]: Threading:PTHREAD SSL:ENGINE Sockets:POLL,IPv6 Auth:LIBWRAP 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG6[3839:3083650736]: file ulimit = 1024 (can be changed with 'ulimit -n') 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG6[3839:3083650736]: poll() used - no FD_SETSIZE limit for file descriptors 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG5[3839:3083650736]: 500 clients allowed 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG7[3839:3083650736]: FD 10 in non-blocking mode 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG7[3839:3083650736]: FD 11 in non-blocking mode 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG7[3839:3083650736]: FD 12 in non-blocking mode 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG7[3839:3083650736]: SO_REUSEADDR option set on accept socket 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG3[3839:3083650736]: Error binding ssmtp to 74.125.93.111:587 2008.12.15 13:53:17 LOG3[3839:3083650736]: bind: Cannot assign requested address (99) Here is how my conf file looks like iqbala@ghar:~$ cat /etc/stunnel/stunnel.conf | egrep -v "^;|^$" cert = /etc/stunnel/stunnel.pem foreground = yes sslVersion = SSLv3 chroot = /var/lib/stunnel4/ setuid = stunnel4 setgid = stunnel4 pid = /stunnel4.pid socket = l:TCP_NODELAY=1 socket = r:TCP_NODELAY=1 debug = 7 output = /var/log/stunnel4/stunnel.log client = yes [ssmtp] accept = smtp.gmail.com:587 connect = 25 Asif Iqbal PGP Key: 0xE62693C5 KeyServer: pgp.mit.edu

5 9

Stunnel and CAPI engine: Issues after OpenSSL upgrade on server side
by Christian Keck 07 Dec '20

07 Dec '20

Hi there, we just upgraded a system that is used as a TLS-proxy for incoming connections using client-ssl-handshake from an old CentOS 6 to a recent Ubuntu LTS. By doing so, the OpenSSL was updated from 1.0.1e to 1.1.1f. Right after installation, the new OpenSSL complained about "too weak ca cypher", so I had to add a line "CipherString = DEFAULT:@SECLEVEL=1" to the openssl.conf to make things work again. After applying the changes, connections via browsers do work again using TLS 1.3. (We will generate a new host-CA some day, but for now we need a running system) Before the upgrade, Stunnel in CAPI-mode worked wih TLS 1.2 encryption. Now after updating the server, it refused to connect at all. Using version 5.56 of Stunnel, I see the following lines in the log: error queue: ssl/statem/statem_lib.c:298: error:141F0006:SSL routines:tls_construct_cert_verify:EVP lib SSL_connect: engines/e_capi.c:814: error:8006F074:lib(128):capi_rsa_priv_enc:function not supported If I nail the protocol setting to TLS1.1 in the apache2-config, the connection is possible again with version 5.56. Any later versions of Stunnel completely refuse to work, I always get lines like: SSL_read: ssl/ssl_rsa.c:36: error:140C618E:SSL routines:SSL_use_certificate:ca md too weak I tried several things I found in the net regarding tweaking openssl.conf and/or stunnel.conf, but I can't get it running with version 5.57 or later. So my questions is: What can I do to get Stunnel working again with at least TLS1.2 (or even better TLS1.3 like I get in most browsers)? Re-generating the host-CA (and thus needing to re-create all client certs) is unfortunately no option for the moment. Many thanks in advance! Cheers, Christian Keck

3 4

Failed to initialize TLS
by Campbell, David 20 Nov '20

20 Nov '20

TLS is not initializing. This is the output. Is there something that I should be including in my conf that would produce this? Or is it just a generic error? [ ] Initializing inetd mode configuration [ ] Running on Windows 6.2 [ ] No limit detected for the number of clients [ ] stunnel 5.57 on x64-pc-mingw32-gnu platform [ ] Compiled/running with OpenSSL 1.1.1h 22 Sep 2020 [ ] Threading WIN32 Sockets:SELECT,IPv6 TLS:ENGINE,OCSP,PSK,SNI [ ] errno: (*_errno()) [ ] GUI message loop initialized [ ] Initializing inetd mode configuration [ ] Running on Windows 6.2 [ . ] Reading configuration from file stunnel.conf [ . ] UTF-8 byte order mark not detected [ ! ] No compression method is available [ ! ] Global options: Failed to initialize TLS [ ! ] Configuration failed [ ] Deallocating temporary section defaults [ ! ] Server is down ________________________________ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the named recipient(s) intended by the sender of this message. This email, and any attachments, may contain confidential and/or proprietary information of Scientific Research Corporation. If you are not a named recipient, any copying, using, disclosing or distributing to others the information in this email and attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the email, any attachments, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts or hard copies of the email and attachments. EXPORT COMPLIANCE NOTICE: This email and any attachments may contain technical data subject to U.S export restrictions under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) or the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). Export or transfer of this technical data and/or related information to any foreign person(s) or entity(ies), either within the U.S. or outside of the U.S., may require advance export authorization by the appropriate U.S. Government agency prior to export or transfer. In addition, technical data may not be exported or transferred to certain countries or specified designated nationals identified by U.S. embargo controls without prior export authorization. By accepting this email and any attachments, all recipients confirm that they understand and will comply with all applicable ITAR, EAR and embargo compliance requirements.

1 0

PSK Configuration
by Giulio Regazzo 16 Nov '20

16 Nov '20

Hi, I'm new to stunnel. And I'm trying to configure a server that accepts TCP sockets connections only from clients that have a pre-shared certificate. Looking at the online documentation I found the verifyPeer option, but it is described to be used on client side. Trying to use it on server side I achieved my goal but only if the client has the whole certificate (private + public). My question is: Can I obtain in some way the same result sharing only the public part of the certificate? Currently I'm using a configuration like this one (skipping the accept and connect options): [Server] cert=wholeCert.pem verifyPeer=yes [Client] cert=wholeCert.pem verifyPeer=yes CAFile=wholeCert.pem and I'm looking for something like: [Server] cert=wholeCert.pem verifyPeer=yes [Client] verifyPeer=yes CAFile=publicCert.pem If I try this second option the server refuses the connection in handshake phase saying that the client didn't provide any certificate. Is there a way to achieve this? Thank you.

2 3

hi
by fieldengineer59＠yahoo.com 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

hi

1 0

hi
by fieldengineer59＠yahoo.com 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

hi

1 0