- stunnel-users - stunnel.org

Re: [stunnel-users] stunnel-users Digest, Vol 181, Issue 3
by Eric Eberhard 28 Aug '19

28 Aug '19

Thanks :) -- I think Daniel can solve his problem. If for some reason he cannot make the app server output clear text he has to do it as you laid out. If he can, he can do one stunnel with TLSv1.2 by making the app output clear text. Both will work and should be secure. I’d do the latter is possible – way less overhead doing encryption. We use similar logic with one stunnel and have millions of transactions daily (XML not cXML but that does not matter – ours are often fairly large as in 100s of MB). Encrypting clear to SSLv3 then back to clear to TLSv1.2 is three encryptions along that path instead of one by making the app output clear text. The app will also shrink if that matters as it won’t need encryption code. E From: stunnel-users [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brent Kimberley Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2019 7:29 AM To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org Subject: Re: [stunnel-users] stunnel-users Digest, Vol 181, Issue 3 >>there is no reason to connect to localhost with any security Should server/interface consolidation trigger functional/technical rework prior to go live? As per the diagram: the app server node x TLS engine node interface is wrapped in SSL the internal localhost x localhost interface is in the clear the TLS engine node x punchout-vendor node is wrapped in TLSv1.2 >> SNI flag (RFC 3546) Good catch. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 08:01:08 -0700 From: "Eric Eberhard" <flash(a)vicsmba.com <mailto:[email protected]> > To: "'Brent Kimberley'" <brent_kimberley(a)rogers.com <mailto:[email protected]> >, <stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org <mailto:[email protected]> > Thank you -- what I had in mind but I am not that fancy with the setups as we use one. We go from our application in clear text to stunnel TLSv1.2 which is clearly easier. I did make this work for a short while a long time ago and did not save the files. Plus no may people's horror we use inetd. Of course we only transfer 4 million XML docs per day and handle 10 million Web calls and another million connections for credit cards, etc. I have been told that if I had serious volume inetd is slower -:) but I have not noticed enough of a slowdown to matter. And inetd (at least on an IBM AIX server) is dead reliable and easy. As a curiosity -- as I often see people coding unnecessarily -- there is no reason to connect to localhost with any security at all unless your app can only output SSLv3 which would imply a 3rd party vendor. The traffic never hits the network in any way -- not even the network card -- it goes directly to/from the TCP/IP stack which is why I mentioned just making the app send clear text to one stunnel that outputs TLSv1.2 ... if possible (may not be if it is something you don't have source to). Eric -----Original Message----- From: Brent Kimberley [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2019 6:42 AM To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org <mailto:[email protected]> Cc: daniel.trickett(a)milliporesigma.com <mailto:[email protected]> ; flash(a)vicsmba.com <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: stunnel-users Digest, Vol 181, Issue 1 Your mileage may vary. ############################################################################### # From internal application to external host ############################################################################### # [Int_Init] -> [Int_Term] -> [Ext_Init] -> [Ext_Term] ############################################################################### # [internal_initiator] ---ssl---> [Internal terminator] # [Internal terminator] ---http---> [external Initiator] # [external Initiator] ---tls---> [external terminator] ############################################################################### # https://www.stunnel.org/static/stunnel.html <https://www.stunnel.org/static/stunnel.html%20> ############################################################################### [Internal_Terminator] options = SSLv3 client = no accept = host_ip:443 connect = localhost:54321 CAfile = int_init_wallet.pem cert = int_term_pub.pem key = int_term_priv.pem [External_Initiator] options = SINGLE_ECDH_USE options = SINGLE_DH_USE ciphers = ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 verify = 3? client = yes options = TLSv1.2 accept = localhost:54321 connect = externalhostname:443 verifyChain = yes renegotiation = no CAfile = ext_term_wallet.pem cert = ext_init_pub.pem key = ext_init_priv.pem ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 18:21:18 +0000 From: Daniel Trickett <daniel.trickett(a)milliporesigma.com <mailto:[email protected]> > To: "stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org <mailto:[email protected]> " <stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: [stunnel-users] https to https proxy Hi, Our punchout vendor switched their site to only accept tls 1.2 over the weekend. Unfortunately our application will only support SSL. We are using stunnel with other vendors but can control the inbound host name. This recent one is one we can't manage as it is the software provider. I found a solution for doing https to https. I'm unclear how I get the first https traffic to route to stunnel as the initial call will be from the application will be to the external host.. Any thoughts on whether this would work for my situation? Appreciate any thoughts.. [Tunnel_in] client = yes accept = host_ip:443 connect = localhost:54321 [Tunnel_out] client = no accept = localhost:54321 connect = externalhostname:443 Best regards, Dan

3 2

Re: [stunnel-users] stunnel-users Digest, Vol 181, Issue 3
by Brent Kimberley 22 Aug '19

22 Aug '19

>>there is no reason to connect to localhost with any security Should server/interface consolidation trigger functional/technical rework prior to go live? As per the diagram: the app server node x TLS engine node interface is wrapped in SSL the internal localhost x localhost interface is in the clear the TLS engine node x punchout-vendor node is wrapped in TLSv1.2 >> SNI flag (RFC 3546)Good catch. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 08:01:08 -0700 From: "Eric Eberhard" <flash(a)vicsmba.com> To: "'Brent Kimberley'" <brent_kimberley(a)rogers.com>, <stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org> Thank you -- what I had in mind but I am not that fancy with the setups as we use one. We go from our application in clear text to stunnel TLSv1.2 which is clearly easier. I did make this work for a short while a long time ago and did not save the files. Plus no may people's horror we use inetd. Of course we only transfer 4 million XML docs per day and handle 10 million Web calls and another million connections for credit cards, etc. I have been told that if I had serious volume inetd is slower -:) but I have not noticed enough of a slowdown to matter. And inetd (at least on an IBM AIX server) is dead reliable and easy. As a curiosity -- as I often see people coding unnecessarily -- there is no reason to connect to localhost with any security at all unless your app can only output SSLv3 which would imply a 3rd party vendor. The traffic never hits the network in any way -- not even the network card -- it goes directly to/from the TCP/IP stack which is why I mentioned just making the app send clear text to one stunnel that outputs TLSv1.2 ... if possible (may not be if it is something you don't have source to). Eric -----Original Message----- From: Brent Kimberley [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2019 6:42 AM To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org Cc: daniel.trickett(a)milliporesigma.com; flash(a)vicsmba.com Subject: Re: stunnel-users Digest, Vol 181, Issue 1 Your mileage may vary. ############################################################################### # From internal application to external host ############################################################################### # [Int_Init] -> [Int_Term] -> [Ext_Init] -> [Ext_Term] ############################################################################### # [internal_initiator] ---ssl---> [Internal terminator] # [Internal terminator] ---http---> [external Initiator] # [external Initiator] ---tls---> [external terminator] ############################################################################### # https://www.stunnel.org/static/stunnel.html ############################################################################### [Internal_Terminator] options = SSLv3 client = no accept = host_ip:443 connect = localhost:54321 CAfile = int_init_wallet.pem cert = int_term_pub.pem key = int_term_priv.pem [External_Initiator] options = SINGLE_ECDH_USE options = SINGLE_DH_USE ciphers = ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 verify = 3? client = yes options = TLSv1.2 accept = localhost:54321 connect = externalhostname:443 verifyChain = yes renegotiation = no CAfile = ext_term_wallet.pem cert = ext_init_pub.pem key = ext_init_priv.pem ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 18:21:18 +0000 From: Daniel Trickett <daniel.trickett(a)milliporesigma.com> To: "stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org" <stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org> Subject: [stunnel-users] https to https proxy Hi, Our punchout vendor switched their site to only accept tls 1.2 over the weekend. Unfortunately our application will only support SSL. We are using stunnel with other vendors but can control the inbound host name. This recent one is one we can't manage as it is the software provider. I found a solution for doing https to https. I'm unclear how I get the first https traffic to route to stunnel as the initial call will be from the application will be to the external host.. Any thoughts on whether this would work for my situation? Appreciate any thoughts.. [Tunnel_in] client = yes accept = host_ip:443 connect = localhost:54321 [Tunnel_out] client = no accept = localhost:54321 connect = externalhostname:443 Best regards, Dan

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] stunnel-users Digest, Vol 181, Issue 1
by Eric Eberhard 21 Aug '19

21 Aug '19

Thank you -- what I had in mind but I am not that fancy with the setups as we use one. We go from our application in clear text to stunnel TLSv1.2 which is clearly easier. I did make this work for a short while a long time ago and did not save the files. Plus no may people's horror we use inetd. Of course we only transfer 4 million XML docs per day and handle 10 million Web calls and another million connections for credit cards, etc. I have been told that if I had serious volume inetd is slower -:) but I have not noticed enough of a slowdown to matter. And inetd (at least on an IBM AIX server) is dead reliable and easy. As a curiosity -- as I often see people coding unnecessarily -- there is no reason to connect to localhost with any security at all unless your app can only output SSLv3 which would imply a 3rd party vendor. The traffic never hits the network in any way -- not even the network card -- it goes directly to/from the TCP/IP stack which is why I mentioned just making the app send clear text to one stunnel that outputs TLSv1.2 ... if possible (may not be if it is something you don't have source to). Eric -----Original Message----- From: Brent Kimberley [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2019 6:42 AM To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org Cc: daniel.trickett(a)milliporesigma.com; flash(a)vicsmba.com Subject: Re: stunnel-users Digest, Vol 181, Issue 1 Your mileage may vary. ############################################################################### # From internal application to external host ############################################################################### # [Int_Init] -> [Int_Term] -> [Ext_Init] -> [Ext_Term] ############################################################################### # [internal_initiator] ---ssl---> [Internal terminator] # [Internal terminator] ---http---> [external Initiator] # [external Initiator] ---tls---> [external terminator] ############################################################################### # https://www.stunnel.org/static/stunnel.html ############################################################################### [Internal_Terminator] options = SSLv3 client = no accept = host_ip:443 connect = localhost:54321 CAfile = int_init_wallet.pem cert = int_term_pub.pem key = int_term_priv.pem [External_Initiator] options = SINGLE_ECDH_USE options = SINGLE_DH_USE ciphers = ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 verify = 3? client = yes options = TLSv1.2 accept = localhost:54321 connect = externalhostname:443 verifyChain = yes renegotiation = no CAfile = ext_term_wallet.pem cert = ext_init_pub.pem key = ext_init_priv.pem ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 18:21:18 +0000 From: Daniel Trickett <daniel.trickett(a)milliporesigma.com> To: "stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org" <stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org> Subject: [stunnel-users] https to https proxy Hi, Our punchout vendor switched their site to only accept tls 1.2 over the weekend. Unfortunately our application will only support SSL. We are using stunnel with other vendors but can control the inbound host name. This recent one is one we can't manage as it is the software provider. I found a solution for doing https to https. I'm unclear how I get the first https traffic to route to stunnel as the initial call will be from the application will be to the external host.. Any thoughts on whether this would work for my situation? Appreciate any thoughts.. [Tunnel_in] client = yes accept = host_ip:443 connect = localhost:54321 [Tunnel_out] client = no accept = localhost:54321 connect = externalhostname:443 Best regards, Dan

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] https to https proxy
by Eric Eberhard 20 Aug '19

20 Aug '19

I'll bite - probably missing something. Why not have your application output clear text to stunnel and set stunnel to TLSv1.2? In other words, drop the SSL from your application. If that won't work I think you can do it with two stunnels (I got it to work once before I did the above). One accepts SSLv3 and outputs clear text . it is the client=no option. The output goes to a stunnel that is client=yes and is set to TLSv1.2 . which outputs to your final destination. The output from the client=no would be to localhost on some port that fires the second stunnel. I suspect you have to use different port numbers. All guesses as I am not sure exactly what you are doing . but if it helps, great :) Eric From: stunnel-users [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Daniel Trickett Sent: Monday, August 19, 2019 11:21 AM To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org Subject: [stunnel-users] https to https proxy Hi, Our punchout vendor switched their site to only accept tls 1.2 over the weekend. Unfortunately our application will only support SSL. We are using stunnel with other vendors but can control the inbound host name. This recent one is one we can't manage as it is the software provider. I found a solution for doing https to https. I'm unclear how I get the first https traffic to route to stunnel as the initial call will be from the application will be to the external host.. Any thoughts on whether this would work for my situation? Appreciate any thoughts.. [Tunnel_in] client = yes accept = host_ip:443 connect = localhost:54321 [Tunnel_out] client = no accept = localhost:54321 connect = externalhostname:443 Best regards, Dan

2 1

Re: [stunnel-users] stunnel-users Digest, Vol 181, Issue 1
by Brent Kimberley 20 Aug '19

20 Aug '19

Your mileage may vary. ############################################################################### # From internal application to external host ############################################################################### # [Int_Init] -> [Int_Term] -> [Ext_Init] -> [Ext_Term] ############################################################################### # [internal_initiator] ---ssl---> [Internal terminator] # [Internal terminator] ---http---> [external Initiator] # [external Initiator] ---tls---> [external terminator] ############################################################################### # https://www.stunnel.org/static/stunnel.html ############################################################################### [Internal_Terminator] options = SSLv3 client = no accept = host_ip:443 connect = localhost:54321 CAfile = int_init_wallet.pem cert = int_term_pub.pem key = int_term_priv.pem [External_Initiator] options = SINGLE_ECDH_USE options = SINGLE_DH_USE ciphers = ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 verify = 3? client = yes options = TLSv1.2 accept = localhost:54321 connect = externalhostname:443 verifyChain = yes renegotiation = no CAfile = ext_term_wallet.pem cert = ext_init_pub.pem key = ext_init_priv.pem ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 18:21:18 +0000 From: Daniel Trickett <daniel.trickett(a)milliporesigma.com> To: "stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org" <stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org> Subject: [stunnel-users] https to https proxy Hi, Our punchout vendor switched their site to only accept tls 1.2 over the weekend. Unfortunately our application will only support SSL. We are using stunnel with other vendors but can control the inbound host name. This recent one is one we can't manage as it is the software provider. I found a solution for doing https to https. I'm unclear how I get the first https traffic to route to stunnel as the initial call will be from the application will be to the external host.. Any thoughts on whether this would work for my situation? Appreciate any thoughts.. [Tunnel_in] client = yes accept = host_ip:443 connect = localhost:54321 [Tunnel_out] client = no accept = localhost:54321 connect = externalhostname:443 Best regards, Dan

1 0

https to https proxy
by Daniel Trickett 19 Aug '19

19 Aug '19

Hi, Our punchout vendor switched their site to only accept tls 1.2 over the weekend. Unfortunately our application will only support SSL. We are using stunnel with other vendors but can control the inbound host name. This recent one is one we can't manage as it is the software provider. I found a solution for doing https to https. I'm unclear how I get the first https traffic to route to stunnel as the initial call will be from the application will be to the external host.. Any thoughts on whether this would work for my situation? Appreciate any thoughts.. [Tunnel_in] client = yes accept = host_ip:443 connect = localhost:54321 [Tunnel_out] client = no accept = localhost:54321 connect = externalhostname:443 Best regards, Dan

1 0

Working OCSP example instructions?
by Mark Currie 24 Jul '19

24 Jul '19

Hi, Does anyone have a link to detailed instructions of a working example of Stunnel with OCSP? (including certificate creation if possible) I came across one some time back but can no longer find it. I would greatly appreciate any help with this. I wasn't able to get any replies to my earlier posting showing my problem: https://www.stunnel.org/pipermail/stunnel-users/2019-July/006451.html

1 0

Is there a latest version Debian stunnel package?
by Miranda Zhang 23 Jul '19

23 Jul '19

Hi everyone, I can only find stunnel4 Debian package: https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=stunnel https://debian.pkgs.org/10/debian-main-amd64/stunnel4_5.50-3_amd64.deb.html ftp://ftp.stunnel.org/stunnel/archive/5.x/stunnel4_5.28-0ubuntu1_amd64.deb <ftp://ftp.stunnel.org/stunnel/archive/5.x/> Is there a 5.55 package? Thanks, Miranda

2 1

Multiple certificates with same hash
by Marco Göbel 23 Jul '19

23 Jul '19

Hi, we use c_rehash to upgrade client certificates and we have multiple certificates with the same hash (e.g. same subject but different start-/end validity) like: ee98f073.0 ee98f073.1 ee98f073.2 The man-page description for the CApath option seems to be correct what stunnel will do: >Note that the certificates in this directory should be named XXXXXXXX.0 >where XXXXXXXX is the hash value of the DER encoded subject of the cert. It seems only certificates with the ending .0 is used by stunnel and the others certificate hashes with higher numbers are never used/read. Can you confirm? Any idea how to use all certificates with stunnel? BTW. we tested with version 4.56 and latest 5.5 Regards, Marco

1 0

Multi-Mode-Stunnel
by MESSINGSCHLAGER Andreas 17 Jul '19

17 Jul '19

Is it possible to run stunnel in the server-mode und in the client-mode on the same server? ------------------------------------------------------ ADG Apotheken-Dienstleistungsgesellschaft mbH Salzachstrasse 15 D-68199 Mannheim ADG ist Gesamt-Sieger der "markt intern" Umfragen "Apotheken - Software 2009, 2011, 2013, 2016 & 2018". Sitz: Mannheim Registergericht: Amtsgericht Mannheim HRB 701436 USt.-IdNr.: DE132763561 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Joachim von Morstein, Bernd Hess, Dr. Max Schwesig Diese E-Mail und alle Anhaenge enthalten vertrauliche und rechtlich geschuetzte Informationen, die ausschliesslich fuer den Gebrauch des Adressaten bestimmt sind. Das unerlaubte Kopieren, die unbefugte Weitergabe oder sonstiger ungenehmigter Gebrauch der E-Mail nebst den Anhaengen sind nicht gestattet. Sollten Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sein oder die E-Mail irrtuemlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte den Absender unverzueglich telefonisch oder per E-Mail und vernichten diese E-Mail und alle Anhaenge sowie etwaige Kopien und Sicherungskopien. Vielen Dank. This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or other use of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail, and delete this message and all copies and backups thereof. Thank you. ------------------------------------------------------

3 2

feature ? authorizing only given certificates ?
by fmgre-dell＠yahoo.fr 15 Jul '19

15 Jul '19

Hello My european organization is using a certificate chain which signs tens of thousands of user certificates. My local organization counts 300 users ... and i only want these 300 to get in the IT system. I'd like to know if there is a way to restrict the connection to a subset of certificates ( for example based on a list of authorized emails which are written in the certificate ) Sincerely Fred

3 4

Possible to verify client certificate BUT ignore expiration-date?
by Brent Kimberley 11 Jul '19

11 Jul '19

Would libfaketime or run_as_date help? Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 10:48:39 -0400 From: Christopher Schultz <chris(a)christopherschultz.net> To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org Subject: Re: [stunnel-users] Possible to verify client certificate BUT ignore expiration-date? Eric, (Coming back to this.) On 5/14/19 14:41, Eric Eberhard wrote: > Chris, > > There are "real" certificates you purchase from a certificate authority and pay an annual fee. If this is https you pretty much need that or the user gets errors. By private I meant "self signed." > > However, openssl has an option to create a certificate. You type the name, address, whatever, and it makes a certificate. It is JUST AS GOOD as a purchased certificate (except https or perhaps others that want certificate authority certificates). I use them for FTP and SSH and many things . > > openssl req -x509 -newkey rsa:4096 -keyout key.pem -out cert.pem -days 365 > > You can put your own expire date(days) when you make the cert. A screen will come up and ask 20 questions :-) If you cannot do it (don't have openssl installed) I can do it for you. It certainly will work as a stop-gap. We don't need it for https as it is Apache on a machine that is hosted. So... everything above is exactly what we do with this vendor. We don't have a problem getting a well-known-CA to sign the certificate. We have (had) a problem with the vendor just getting the damned work done. Yes, I know it is a 5-minute process but when you are dealing with a big company where you have to have 6 managers in multiple time zones call each other to confirm the problem, have a meeting about the solution, determine a course of action, allocate a resource to perform the work, QA the solution, then get an IT review of everything before placing something into production, that 5-minute fix can take days or weeks. I just wanted to say "I still trust this certificate, even though it has expired." Is that possible to do without recompiling stunnel? Thanks, -chris

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] Possible to verify client certificate BUT ignore expiration-date?
by Christopher Schultz 11 Jul '19

11 Jul '19

Eric, (Coming back to this.) On 5/14/19 14:41, Eric Eberhard wrote: > Chris, > > There are "real" certificates you purchase from a certificate authority and pay an annual fee. If this is https you pretty much need that or the user gets errors. By private I meant "self signed." > > However, openssl has an option to create a certificate. You type the name, address, whatever, and it makes a certificate. It is JUST AS GOOD as a purchased certificate (except https or perhaps others that want certificate authority certificates). I use them for FTP and SSH and many things . > > openssl req -x509 -newkey rsa:4096 -keyout key.pem -out cert.pem -days 365 > > You can put your own expire date(days) when you make the cert. A screen will come up and ask 20 questions :-) If you cannot do it (don't have openssl installed) I can do it for you. It certainly will work as a stop-gap. We don't need it for https as it is Apache on a machine that is hosted. So... everything above is exactly what we do with this vendor. We don't have a problem getting a well-known-CA to sign the certificate. We have (had) a problem with the vendor just getting the damned work done. Yes, I know it is a 5-minute process but when you are dealing with a big company where you have to have 6 managers in multiple time zones call each other to confirm the problem, have a meeting about the solution, determine a course of action, allocate a resource to perform the work, QA the solution, then get an IT review of everything before placing something into production, that 5-minute fix can take days or weeks. I just wanted to say "I still trust this certificate, even though it has expired." Is that possible to do without recompiling stunnel? Thanks, -chris > -----Original Message----- > From: stunnel-users [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Christopher Schultz > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 6:49 AM > To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org > Subject: Re: [stunnel-users] Possible to verify client certificate BUT ignore expiration-date? > > Eric, > > On 5/13/19 18:06, Eric Eberhard wrote: >> Use openssl to make a private cert? > > What is a "private cert"? > > Also, I need to trust an existing certificate... If they can create a new certificate, then I can just trust the new one. I'm looking for a stop-gap measure, here. > > Thanks, > -chris > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: stunnel-users [mailto:[email protected]] On >> Behalf Of Christopher Schultz >> Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 2:28 PM >> To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org >> Subject: [stunnel-users] Possible to verify client certificate BUT ignore expiration-date? >> >> All, >> >> Does anyone know if it is possible to perform all other verification of a client certificate EXCEPT allow the certificate to have expired? >> >> We have a vendor whose certificate has expired, and we want to allow >> their old certificate to work while they chase their tails trying to >> figure out the best way to re-issue a new cert for us. *eyeroll* >> >> Is it possible? >> >> Thanks, >> -chris >> >> >> >> > > >

1 0

OCSP problem - wrong cert validated
by Mark Currie 11 Jul '19

11 Jul '19

Hi, I am having a problem using OCSP with Stunnel. client: stunnel-5.55, server: stunnel-5.49, both using openssl-1.0.2k-fips. When I use the openssl ocsp command it works fine e.g.: openssl ocsp -issuer idca-rootca.pem -CAfile idca-rootca.pem -cert server-cert.pem -url http://10.0.0.166:40040 Response verify OK server-cert.pem: good Wireshark: OCSP request contains the server cert serial number, and OCSP response returns "certStatus: good(0)". However, when I use Stunnel the OCSP lookup fails (Connection reset by peer), and in the Stunnel log I get: LOG3[0]: OCSP: OCSP_basic_verify: ocsp_vfy.c:166: error:27069070:OCSP routines:OCSP_basic_verify:root ca not trusted Wireshark: OCSP request now contains the issuer (idca) instead of the server cert serial number, and the OCSP response returns "certStatus: unknown (2)". I have tried various combinations of cert and CA pem files e.g. server cert on its own, then including idca, then including both idca and rootca. I have also tried all combinations of CA cert, even including all certs in it. I am testing Stunnel using SSH over TLS and here are the configs: Stunnel client config: [ssh] CAfile = idca-rootca.pem cert = client-cert.pem key = client-key.pem accept=40010 connect=10.0.0.166:40010 verifyPeer = yes OCSP = http://10.0.0.166:40040 Stunnel server config: [sshd] CAfile = idca-rootca.pem cert = server-cert.pem key = server-key.pem accept = 10.0.0.166:40010 connect = 22 Appreciate any help with this problem.

1 0

Academic doubt about firewall bypass
by Brent Kimberley 09 Jul '19

09 Jul '19

Which scenario did you have in mind? [HTTP CLIENT] -->[STUNNEL CLIENT]--><whatever>-->[STUNNEL SERVER]-->[HTTP Server] OR[HTTP Client] -->[Forward-proxy client]-> [STUNNEL CLIENT]--> <whatever>-->[STUNNEL SERVER]-->[REVERSE-PROXY server]--><whatever>--> [HTTP SERVER ] From: Hugo Marello <hugo.marello(a)gmail.com> To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org Hello guys, I'm new to using stunnel but I find it quite a powerful tool. I'm doing a POC on how we can bypass our firewall even with DPI, and chose to use stunnel for an extra layer of cryptography. You don't have to worry about access to any VM mentioned here. Here is my scenario: [CLIENT BROWSER] -->[STUNNEL CLIENT]-->[FIREWALL]-->[STUNNEL SERVER]-->[REVERSE PROXY]-->[FREE INTERNET] So far I succeeded in getting HTTP working using stunnel CONNECT protocol to the firewall and going all the way through. The problem is when I try to access HTTPS, the connection get set to the stunnel server but it keeps waiting for something. Double checked all the logs, firewall can't discern, stunnel server get the connection, reverse proxy also get the socket connection. My hypothesis is that stunnel client gets the CONNECT from the browser and discard it, it uses its own way to connect to the firewall, instead of encrypting the CONNECT all the way through. As it may seems, I need a way to send 2 CONNECT packages. Does anyone know how can I proceed? Follow my configs: client = yes output = /var/log/stunnel4/stunnel.log debug = 7 [bypassclient] accept = 4000 connect = firewall.example:3128 protocolHost = destination.com:443 protocol = connect requireCert = no verifyChain = no verifyPeer = no -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [bypassserver] accept = 0.0.0.0:443 connect = reverseproxy.com:8888 cert = /etc/ssl/cert.pem key = /etc/ssl/key.pem ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you all in advance, already digging throw the source code (quite lost tough), Hugo

1 1

Re: [stunnel-users] stunnel-users Digest, Vol 180, Issue 1
by Hugo Marello 09 Jul '19

09 Jul '19

I was thinking something more simple like the first scenario. [HTTP?CLIENT] -->[STUNNEL CLIENT]--><whatever>-->[STUNNEL SERVER]-->[HTTP Server] But the end would be an HTTPS server, which would require a CONNECT to get things going. So: [HTTP Client] -->[STUNNEL CLIENT]--> <whatever>-->[STUNNEL SERVER]-->[REVERSE-PROXY server]--> [HTTPS SERVER] Em ter, 9 de jul de 2019 às 07:00, <stunnel-users-request(a)stunnel.org> escreveu: > Send stunnel-users mailing list submissions to > stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://www.stunnel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > stunnel-users-request(a)stunnel.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > stunnel-users-owner(a)stunnel.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of stunnel-users digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Academic doubt about firewall bypass (Brent Kimberley) > 2. How to turn off logging (David Yunker) > 3. Re: How to turn off logging (Thomas Eifert) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 16:42:39 +0000 (UTC) > From: Brent Kimberley <brent_kimberley(a)rogers.com> > To: <stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org> > Cc: "hugo.marello(a)gmail.com" <hugo.marello(a)gmail.com> > Subject: [stunnel-users] Academic doubt about firewall bypass > Message-ID: <182803560.2815516.1562604159801(a)mail.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Which scenario did you have in mind? > [HTTP?CLIENT] -->[STUNNEL CLIENT]--><whatever>-->[STUNNEL SERVER]-->[HTTP > Server]?OR[HTTP Client] -->[Forward-proxy client]->?[STUNNEL CLIENT]--> > <whatever>-->[STUNNEL SERVER]-->[REVERSE-PROXY server]--><whatever>--> > [HTTP SERVER ] > > > > From: Hugo Marello <hugo.marello(a)gmail.com> > To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org > > Hello guys, > I'm new to using stunnel but I find it quite a powerful tool. I'm doing a > POC on how we can bypass our firewall even with DPI, and chose to use > stunnel for an extra layer of cryptography. You don't have to worry about > access to any VM mentioned here. Here is my scenario: > > [CLIENT BROWSER] -->[STUNNEL CLIENT]-->[FIREWALL]-->[STUNNEL > SERVER]-->[REVERSE PROXY]-->[FREE INTERNET] > > So far I succeeded in getting HTTP working using stunnel CONNECT protocol > to the firewall and going all the way through. The problem is when I try to > access HTTPS, the connection get set to the stunnel server but it keeps > waiting for something. Double checked all the logs, firewall can't discern, > stunnel server get the connection, reverse proxy also get the socket > connection. My hypothesis is that stunnel client gets the CONNECT from the > browser and discard it, it uses its own way to connect to the firewall, > instead of encrypting the CONNECT all the way through. As it may seems, I > need a way to send 2 CONNECT packages. Does anyone know how can I proceed? > > Follow my configs: > client = yes > output = /var/log/stunnel4/stunnel.log > debug = 7 > > [bypassclient] > accept = 4000 > connect = firewall.example:3128 > protocolHost = destination.com:443 > protocol = connect > requireCert = no > verifyChain = no > verifyPeer = no > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > [bypassserver] > accept = 0.0.0.0:443 > connect = reverseproxy.com:8888 > cert = /etc/ssl/cert.pem > key = /etc/ssl/key.pem > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Thank you all in advance, already digging throw the source code (quite lost > tough), > Hugo >

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] Error during linking Stunnel 5.55
by Eric Eberhard 09 Jul '19

09 Jul '19

The whole 32 bit vs 64 bit thing is a pain. On Windows and Linux you have to load all kinds of unobvious things. On AIX it just works. Code from 1988 (when I lost source code for half a dozen programs) still works on current machines. Why the others make it SO HARD is beyond me. In AIX old code works. One flag – saying you want 64 bit – is all you need to add to the Makefile. Otherwise is just works as always. It took me MONTHS to figure out how to make Linuc work – had to yum 32 bit, 64 bit, a compat set, etc. Nightmare. Wish people would consider keeping things compatible like IBM does. Ditto on new features. Any new feature you merely need to add a flag, and all is good. Otherwise the old ones keep working. An example is POSIX. With IBM/AIX you could do things the old way, or set a flag for POSIX. Yes, we have had the same source (with updates, I did do the POSIX updates) since 1988. Never a problem. Partly, I think, because they don’t deprecate ANYTHING. Use the old routines if you like. Or not if you chose. Your problem is not having ALL of the required libraries! That is it. Finding what you need is the challenge. Eric From: stunnel-users [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Heinsbroek, Peter Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2019 6:20 AM To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org Subject: [stunnel-users] Error during linking Stunnel 5.55 I tried to build stunnel from the sources. The compiling goes well ,but the linking gives an error When comping 32bit I get : sthreads.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol _CRYPTO_set_id_callback referenced in function _sthreads_init ..\bin\win32\stunnel.exe : fatal error LNK1120: 1 unresolved externals NMAKE : fatal error U1077: '"C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio\2017\Professional\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.16.27023\bin\HostX86\x86\link.EXE"' : return code '0x460' Stop. Anyone knows how to solve. Met vriendelijke groet, Peter Heinsbroek ICT Specialist – IDM TTS BTN/NL-TEC-Generic-Infra-S2 T: +31 (0) 88 265 9869 M: +31 (0) 6 53753244 Burg. Rijnderslaan 30 – Nederland <https://atos.net/> atos.net <https://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-heinsbroek-10467b52/> This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy it. As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, Atos’ liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although the sender endeavours to maintain a computer virus-free network, the sender does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and will not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted. On all offers and agreements under which Atos Nederland B.V. supplies goods and/or services of whatever nature, the Terms of Delivery from Atos Nederland B.V. exclusively apply. The Terms of Delivery shall be promptly submitted to you on your request.

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] How to turn off logging
by Eric Eberhard 09 Jul '19

09 Jul '19

Yes - just difficult :) We have our own logging in our application and we don't want stunnel's logging (or on screen error messages) to occur. We want them to go to our log files. So simply go to log.c and change the log_error() routines. I keep notes of any changes I make so that when I get new version I can repeat them. Eric From: stunnel-users [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David Yunker Sent: Monday, July 08, 2019 2:47 PM To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org Subject: [stunnel-users] How to turn off logging To whom it may concern, I would like to know if there is a way to disable logging or set a size limit or to have it overwrite the log file each time a new log is started? I am using the Windows version of Stunnel. Thank you for your help.

1 0

Error during linking Stunnel 5.55
by Heinsbroek, Peter 09 Jul '19

09 Jul '19

I tried to build stunnel from the sources. The compiling goes well ,but the linking gives an error When comping 32bit I get : sthreads.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol _CRYPTO_set_id_callback referenced in function _sthreads_init ..\bin\win32\stunnel.exe : fatal error LNK1120: 1 unresolved externals NMAKE : fatal error U1077: '"C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio\2017\Professional\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.16.27023\bin\HostX86\x86\link.EXE"' : return code '0x460' Stop. Anyone knows how to solve. Met vriendelijke groet, [Atos logo] Peter Heinsbroek ICT Specialist – IDM TTS BTN/NL-TEC-Generic-Infra-S2 T: +31 (0) 88 265 9869 M: +31 (0) 6 53753244 Burg. Rijnderslaan 30 – Nederland atos.net<https://atos.net/> [LinkedIn icon]<https://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-heinsbroek-10467b52/> This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy it. As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, Atos’ liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although the sender endeavours to maintain a computer virus-free network, the sender does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and will not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted. On all offers and agreements under which Atos Nederland B.V. supplies goods and/or services of whatever nature, the Terms of Delivery from Atos Nederland B.V. exclusively apply. The Terms of Delivery shall be promptly submitted to you on your request.

1 0

How to turn off logging
by David Yunker 08 Jul '19

08 Jul '19

To whom it may concern, I would like to know if there is a way to disable logging or set a size limit or to have it overwrite the log file each time a new log is started? I am using the Windows version of Stunnel. Thank you for your help.

2 1

Academic doubt about firewall bypass
by Hugo Marello 28 Jun '19

28 Jun '19

Hello guys, I'm new to using stunnel but I find it quite a powerful tool. I'm doing a POC on how we can bypass our firewall even with DPI, and chose to use stunnel for an extra layer of cryptography. You don't have to worry about access to any VM mentioned here. Here is my scenario: [CLIENT BROWSER] -->[STUNNEL CLIENT]-->[FIREWALL]-->[STUNNEL SERVER]-->[REVERSE PROXY]-->[FREE INTERNET] So far I succeeded in getting HTTP working using stunnel CONNECT protocol to the firewall and going all the way through. The problem is when I try to access HTTPS, the connection get set to the stunnel server but it keeps waiting for something. Double checked all the logs, firewall can't discern, stunnel server get the connection, reverse proxy also get the socket connection. My hypothesis is that stunnel client gets the CONNECT from the browser and discard it, it uses its own way to connect to the firewall, instead of encrypting the CONNECT all the way through. As it may seems, I need a way to send 2 CONNECT packages. Does anyone know how can I proceed? Follow my configs: client = yes output = /var/log/stunnel4/stunnel.log debug = 7 [bypassclient] accept = 4000 connect = firewall.example:3128 protocolHost = destination.com:443 protocol = connect requireCert = no verifyChain = no verifyPeer = no -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [bypassserver] accept = 0.0.0.0:443 connect = reverseproxy.com:8888 cert = /etc/ssl/cert.pem key = /etc/ssl/key.pem ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you all in advance, already digging throw the source code (quite lost tough), Hugo

1 0

SOLVED, I cannot get Outlook Express email to work after Cox changes
by Brent Kimberley 28 Jun '19

28 Jun '19

Thank you Brent, >> I found if I have Avast running with mail shield enabled I get this error in the Stunnel log window: >> SSL_connect: 140770FC: error:140770FC:SSL routines:SSL23_GET_SERVER_HELLO:unknown protocol >> Connection reset: 0 byte(s) sent to TLS, 0 byte(s) sent to socket. >> >> This results in no emails being abled to be sent by SMPT. >> >> If I disable Avast's mail shield the mail is sent with no errors. >> Is there a work around for to be able to use Stunnel without disabling Avast's mail shield? >> POP3 Connection >> CERT: Pre-verification error: self signed certificate in certificate chain >> Rejected by CERT at depth=1: OU=generated by Avast Antivirus for SSL/TLS scanning, O=Avast Web/Mail Shield, CN=Avast Web/Mail Shield Root >> SSL_connect: 14090086: error:14090086:SSL routines:ssl3_get_server_certificate:certificate verify failed If you need avast, sign your stunnel leaf with a well known root CA, and exchange certificates accordingly. cox_mail : avast_dpi : stunnel_TLS_proxy : client https://support.postbox-inc.com/hc/en-us/articles/204602300-Invalid-Securit…

1 0

stunnel-users Digest, Vol 179, Issue 11
by David Yunker 28 Jun '19

28 Jun '19

Brent, Here is more log information that occurs when using Avast Mail shield. CERT: Pre-verification error: self signed certificate in certificate chain Rejected by CERT at depth=1: OU=generated by Avast Antivirus for SSL/TLS scanning, O=Avast Web/Mail Shield, CN=Avast Web/Mail Shield Root SSL_connect: 14090086: error:14090086:SSL routines:ssl3_get_server_certificate:certificate verify failed This occurs in the POP3 connection. Hope this helps.

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] stunnel-users Digest, Vol 179, Issue 11
by Brent Kimberley 28 Jun '19

28 Jun '19

>>Does anybody know how to prevent this from happening? Try adding the following: #verify the peer certificate chain starting from the root CA #pre-requisite #1: checkHost (OR checkIP) #pre-requisite #2: CAfile (OR CApath) verifyChain = yes checkHost = pop.cox.com #verify the peer certificate chain starting from the root CA #pre-requisite #1: checkHost (ORcheckIP) #pre-requisite #2: CAfile (OR CApath) verifyChain = yes checkHost = smtp.cox.net ref: https://www.stunnel.org/config_windows.html https://www.stunnel.org/static/stunnel.html From: David Yunker <davidyunker(a)hotmail.com> Subject: [stunnel-users] SOLVED, I cannot get Outlook Express email to work after Cox changes To anybody interested, Here is how to configure Stunnel for Outlook Express v6 in Windows XP to work: Modify Stunnel configuration to this: [cox-pop3] client = yes accept = 127.0.0.1:110 connect = pop.cox.net:995 CAfile = ca-certs.perm OCSPaia = yes [cox-smtp] client = yes accept = 127.0.0.1:25 connect = smtp.cox.net:587 CAfile = ca-certs.perm OCSPaia = yes Now configure Outlook Express as follows: Set incoming mail(POP3) to 127.0.0.1 Set outgoing mail(SMTP) to 127.0.0.1 Have "Logon using secure password authentication" unchecked. Have "My server requires authentication" unchecked For POP3 set incoming mail (POP3) to port 110. For SMTP set outgoing mail (SMTP) to port 25. Have "This server requires a secure connection(SSL)" for POP3 unchecked. Have "This server requires a secure connection(SSL)" for SMTP unchecked. Everything works except I have the following error message in the Stunnel log: "Service [service name] needs authentication to prevent MITM attacks" Does anybody know how to prevent this from happening? I tried having the "My server requires authentication" checked but I still have the message when Stunnel starts. Thank you for any help.

2 1

openssl integration
by Brent Kimberley 27 Jun '19

27 Jun '19

Try the following: .\openssl engine -vvvv https://github.com/openssl/openssl/blob/OpenSSL_1_1_1-stable/README.ENGINE

2 1