- stunnel-users - stunnel.org

Connection refused, then connects
by James Brown 17 May '19

17 May '19

Can anyone tell me why It tries ::1:25 first and fails before connecting to 127.0.0.1:25? 2019.05.17 13:48:34 LOG5[21]: Service [ssmtp465] accepted connection from ::ffff:192.168.1.76:49170 2019.05.17 13:48:34 LOG3[21]: s_connect: connect ::1:25: Connection refused (61) 2019.05.17 13:48:34 LOG5[21]: s_connect: connected 127.0.0.1:25 2019.05.17 13:48:34 LOG5[21]: Service [ssmtp465] connected remote server from 127.0.0.1:56701 /usr/local/etc/stunnel/stunnel.conf has: [ssmtp465] client = no accept = 465 connect = 25 options = NO_SSLv2 #transparent = source [ssmtp587] client = no accept = 587 connect = 127.0.0.1:25 options = NO_SSLv2 #transparent = source Not sure if this is relevant, but when I startup I get: 2019.05.17 12:45:27 LOG5[ui]: stunnel 5.53 on x86_64-apple-darwin18.5.0 platform 2019.05.17 12:45:27 LOG5[ui]: Compiled/running with OpenSSL 1.0.2r 26 Feb 2019 2019.05.17 12:45:27 LOG5[ui]: Threading:PTHREAD Sockets:POLL,IPv6 TLS:ENGINE,FIPS,OCSP,PSK,SNI 2019.05.17 12:45:27 LOG5[ui]: Reading configuration from file /usr/local/etc/stunnel/stunnel.conf 2019.05.17 12:45:27 LOG5[ui]: UTF-8 byte order mark detected 2019.05.17 12:45:27 LOG5[ui]: FIPS mode disabled 2019.05.17 12:45:27 LOG4[ui]: Insecure file permissions on /usr/local/etc/dovecot/mail.bordo.com.au.pem 2019.05.17 12:45:27 LOG4[ui]: Insecure file permissions on /usr/local/etc/dovecot/mail.bordo.com.au.pem 2019.05.17 12:45:27 LOG5[ui]: Configuration successful 2019.05.17 12:45:27 LOG5[ui]: Binding service [ssmtp465] to 0.0.0.0:465: Address already in use (48) 2019.05.17 12:45:27 LOG5[ui]: Binding service [ssmtp587] to 0.0.0.0:587: Address already in use (48) No idea what is already using those ports. Any suggestions? macOS 10.14.4 Thanks, James.

3 3

stunnel 5.54 released
by Michal Trojnara 15 May '19

15 May '19

Dear Users, I have released version 5.54 of stunnel. Version 5.54, 2019.05.15, urgency: LOW * New features - New "ticketKeySecret" and "ticketMacSecret" options to control confidentiality and integrity protection of the issued session tickets. These options allow for session resumption on other nodes in a cluster. - Added logging the list of active connections on SIGUSR2 or with Windows GUI. - Logging of the assigned bind address instead of the requested bind address. * Bugfixes - Service threads are terminated before OpenSSL cleanup to prevent occasional stunnel crashes at shutdown. Home page: https://www.stunnel.org/ Download: https://www.stunnel.org/downloads.html SHA-256 hashes: 5e8588a6c274b46b1d63e1b50f0725f4908dec736f6588eb48d1eb3d20c87902 stunnel-5.54.tar.gz ed8424731f7d6e0c9b11f4c7b597a072e558dae7979102d0b213759678079481 stunnel-5.54-win64-installer.exe 7659f605065e5155577a99abe1129dbc89523796196c8bf50d3fa9265ec34d93 stunnel-5.54-android.zip Best regards, Mike

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] Stunnel 5.44 server side 'exec = pppd' runs second child 'pppd' process after reconnection. Bug?
by Eric Eberhard 15 May '19

15 May '19

Killing anything will change the PID. If the PID needs to be constant a zombie is bad news! Zombies stink! E -----Original Message----- From: Jochen Bern [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2019 1:42 AM To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org Cc: Florian Lohoff <f(a)zz.de>; Eric Eberhard <flash(a)vicsmba.com> Subject: Re: [stunnel-users] Stunnel 5.44 server side 'exec = pppd' runs second child 'pppd' process after reconnection. Bug? On 05/15/2019 12:22 AM, Florian Lohoff wrote: > On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 11:30:29AM -0700, Eric Eberhard wrote: >> That is not a bad idea. I'd wrap it in a C program so I could check >> if the pppd is alive and not a zombie. > > pppd is a pretty solid piece of software. Never seen it hang as a > zombie. A zombie process is *terminated* and, basically, just a remaining entry in the kernel's process table. It's not hanging around because of something its own code did wrong, but because its parent process fails to "reap" its child (first and foremost, collect its exit code from the kernel). Killing the parent cleans up zombies because the zombies get re-parented to the init / systemd process (PID 1), which then does the reaping. Regards, -- Jochen Bern Systemingenieur

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] Stunnel 5.44 server side 'exec = pppd' runs second child 'pppd' process after reconnection. Bug?
by Jochen Bern 15 May '19

15 May '19

On 05/15/2019 12:22 AM, Florian Lohoff wrote: > On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 11:30:29AM -0700, Eric Eberhard wrote: >> That is not a bad idea. I'd wrap it in a C program so I could check >> if the pppd is alive and not a zombie. > > pppd is a pretty solid piece of software. Never seen it hang as a > zombie. A zombie process is *terminated* and, basically, just a remaining entry in the kernel's process table. It's not hanging around because of something its own code did wrong, but because its parent process fails to "reap" its child (first and foremost, collect its exit code from the kernel). Killing the parent cleans up zombies because the zombies get re-parented to the init / systemd process (PID 1), which then does the reaping. Regards, -- Jochen Bern Systemingenieur

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] Possible to verify client certificate BUT ignore expiration-date?
by Eric Eberhard 14 May '19

14 May '19

Use openssl to make a private cert? E -----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

2 1

Re: [stunnel-users] Stunnel 5.44 server side 'exec = pppd' runs second child 'pppd' process after reconnection. Bug?
by Eric Eberhard 14 May '19

14 May '19

Yes. Use inetd (or equivalent). Making an independent server work is difficult due to the problems like you are having. Inetd is in many O/S included and essential, others available. It always works. Always. Yes, there is a tiny amount of overhead for making connections. On an ancient AIX IBM I manage 2-4 million XML documents exchanged per day with no problems, all with inetd. Try it – save yourself some misery. Or maybe it won’t help at all except to add information :) E From: stunnel-users [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Martin Got Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 9:08 AM To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org Subject: [stunnel-users] Stunnel 5.44 server side 'exec = pppd' runs second child 'pppd' process after reconnection. Bug? I'm trying to make stunnel wrapped ppp connection to achieve bidirectional data transfer over stunnel like shown below. Stunnel client --connect--> Stunnel server pppd client --connect--> pppd server 10.0.1.2 <--data--> 10.0.1.1 OpenBSD 6.4amd64 with Stunnel 5.44 server works till stunnel retries 'exec = pppd' section once stunnel client is reconnected. Also 'exec = pppd' section retries after a short network related communication lag also. Previous 'pppd' child instance haven't killed by stunnel 5.44 before new instance started. So second 'pppd' process started and runs simultaneously with the first 'pppd' and link down. Restarting Stunnel server can clear child 'pppd' processes. So newly reestablished 'pppd' link between 10.0.1.1 <--> 10.0.1.2 endpoints works till next interconnection. Does stunnel server have an option to start only one instance in 'exec' section or what should be done to fix this? Any suggestions highly appreciated. # ps -axu | grep pppd user 43231 0.0 0.0 476 0:00.01 persist lock passive 10.0.1.1:10.0.1.2 local noauth (pppd) user 39187 0.0 0.0 468 0:00.01 persist lock passive 10.0.1.1:10.0.1.2 local noauth (pppd) # tail -n 10 /var/log/daemon pppd[39187] pppd 2.3.5 started by user, uid 0 pppd[43231] Using interface ppp1 pppd[43231] Connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/ttyp2 pppd[43231] Local IP address 10.0.1.1 pppd[43231] Remote IP address 10.0.1.2 pppd[39187] pppd 2.3.5 started by user, uid 0 pppd[39187] Using interface ppp0 pppd[39187] Connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/ttyp5 pppd[39187] Couldn't set interface address: Address 10.0.1.1 or destination 10.0.1.2 already exists Stunnel configurations for server and client: 1. Server's configuration ... foreground = yes debug = 7 socket = l:TCP_NODELAY=1 socket = r:TCP_NODELAY=1 ;socket = l:SO_LINGER=1:60 ; Session cache sessionCacheSize = 100 sessionCacheTimeout = 600 stack = 65536 TIMEOUTbusy = 600 TIMEOUTconnect = 10 TIMEOUTidle = 43200 TIMEOUTclose = 5 [ppp] accept = LOCAL-IP:PORT exec = /usr/sbin/pppd execargs = lock 10.0.1.1:10.0.1.2 local debug noauth ;execargs = lock passive 10.0.1.1:10.0.1.2 local debug noauth pty = yes CAfile = ca.crt cert = server.crt key = server.key verifyChain = yes 2. Stunnel client's configuration ... foreground = yes debug = 7 socket = l:TCP_NODELAY=1 socket = r:TCP_NODELAY=1 ; Session cache sessionCacheSize = 1 sessionCacheTimeout = 600 failover = rr [ppp] client = yes retry = yes connect = REMOTE-IP:PORT exec = /usr/sbin/pppd execargs = defaultroute persist lock passive 10.0.1.2:10.0.1.1 local debug noauth name ppp-client pty = yes CAfile = ca.crt cert = client.crt key = client.key verifyChain = yes checkHost = REMOTE-HOSTNAME ;checkIP = 1.2.3.4

2 1

Re: [stunnel-users] Stunnel 5.44 server side 'exec = pppd' runs second child 'pppd' process after reconnection. Bug?
by Eric Eberhard 14 May '19

14 May '19

Sounds good. The inetd will handle the dropping of connections just fine ... but the below sounds like it would help even more. E -----Original Message----- From: stunnel-users [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter Pentchev Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 2:16 PM To: Martin Got <martingot(a)protonmail.com> Cc: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org Subject: Re: [stunnel-users] Stunnel 5.44 server side 'exec = pppd' runs second child 'pppd' process after reconnection. Bug? On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 04:07:57PM +0000, Martin Got wrote: > I'm trying to make stunnel wrapped ppp connection to achieve bidirectional data transfer over stunnel like shown below. > > Stunnel client --connect--> Stunnel server > pppd client --connect--> pppd server > 10.0.1.2 <--data--> 10.0.1.1 > > OpenBSD 6.4amd64 with Stunnel 5.44 server works till stunnel retries 'exec = pppd' section once stunnel client is reconnected. Also 'exec = pppd' section retries after a short network related communication lag also. Previous 'pppd' child instance haven't killed by stunnel 5.44 before new instance started. > > So second 'pppd' process started and runs simultaneously with the first 'pppd' and link down. Restarting Stunnel server can clear child 'pppd' processes. So newly reestablished 'pppd' link between 10.0.1.1 <--> 10.0.1.2 endpoints works till next interconnection. > > Does stunnel server have an option to start only one instance in 'exec' section or what should be done to fix this? Unfortunately, stunnel was not designed for your use case; it was designed to allow many different clients to make use of different instances of the same server program, one instance per client. You might try to do something else: if you really only have a single PPP client and you can really guarantee that anything that connects to stunnel must reuse the same connection, you could write a separate program that listens on a TCP port or on a local Unix socket, waits for the first connection, starts an instance of pppd, and then, from that point on, sends all the traffic from this instance to all the connections that it has received, even if a new connection appears before the old one has been torn down. Then you can point stunnel to the local Unix socket of that service, and anything that connects to stunnel will establish a new connection to your service, but it will not matter, since your service will be written in such a way as to send all the traffic to all the connections. So the service should do something like: 1. Create a local Unix socket and start listening on it. 2. Wait for the first connection. 3. Start an instance of pppd (at most one instance shall be running at any point in time) 4. Keep waiting for new connections; accept any and treat them all in the same way. 5. If any data comes from a remote connection, send it to pppd. 6. If any data comes from pppd, send it to *all* the remote connections. 7. If any of the remote connections is closed, well, so be it, good riddance, another one will come along presently (or maybe another one has already come along and has started talking to pppd through this service). 8. If the pppd child process dies, close all the remote connections and go back to step 2. Then you shall only have a problem if there are two "real" connections from different places at the same time - but if I understand your setup correctly, this should not really happen, since it is only you (your laptop or something like that) that connects to the PPP server. If you want, I could try to whip up some simple implementation of such a pseudo-multiplexer. G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev roam(a){ringlet.net,debian.org,FreeBSD.org} pp(a)storpool.com PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint 2EE7 A7A5 17FC 124C F115 C354 651E EFB0 2527 DF13

1 0

Possible to verify client certificate BUT ignore expiration-date?
by Christopher Schultz 13 May '19

13 May '19

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

Stunnel 5.44 server side 'exec = pppd' runs second child 'pppd' process after reconnection. Bug?
by Martin Got 13 May '19

13 May '19

I'm trying to make stunnel wrapped ppp connection to achieve bidirectional data transfer over stunnel like shown below. Stunnel client --connect--> Stunnel server pppd client --connect--> pppd server 10.0.1.2 <--data--> 10.0.1.1 OpenBSD 6.4amd64 with Stunnel 5.44 server works till stunnel retries 'exec = pppd' section once stunnel client is reconnected. Also 'exec = pppd' section retries after a short network related communication lag also. Previous 'pppd' child instance haven't killed by stunnel 5.44 before new instance started. So second 'pppd' process started and runs simultaneously with the first 'pppd' and link down. Restarting Stunnel server can clear child 'pppd' processes. So newly reestablished 'pppd' link between 10.0.1.1 <--> 10.0.1.2 endpoints works till next interconnection. Does stunnel server have an option to start only one instance in 'exec' section or what should be done to fix this? Any suggestions highly appreciated. # ps -axu | grep pppd user 43231 0.0 0.0 476 0:00.01 persist lock passive 10.0.1.1:10.0.1.2 local noauth (pppd) user 39187 0.0 0.0 468 0:00.01 persist lock passive 10.0.1.1:10.0.1.2 local noauth (pppd) # tail -n 10 /var/log/daemon pppd[39187] pppd 2.3.5 started by user, uid 0 pppd[43231] Using interface ppp1 pppd[43231] Connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/ttyp2 pppd[43231] Local IP address 10.0.1.1 pppd[43231] Remote IP address 10.0.1.2 pppd[39187] pppd 2.3.5 started by user, uid 0 pppd[39187] Using interface ppp0 pppd[39187] Connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/ttyp5 pppd[39187] Couldn't set interface address: Address 10.0.1.1 or destination 10.0.1.2 already exists Stunnel configurations for server and client: 1. Server's configuration ... foreground = yes debug = 7 socket = l:TCP_NODELAY=1 socket = r:TCP_NODELAY=1 ;socket = l:SO_LINGER=1:60 ; Session cache sessionCacheSize = 100 sessionCacheTimeout = 600 stack = 65536 TIMEOUTbusy = 600 TIMEOUTconnect = 10 TIMEOUTidle = 43200 TIMEOUTclose = 5 [ppp] accept = LOCAL-IP:PORT exec = /usr/sbin/pppd execargs = lock 10.0.1.1:10.0.1.2 local debug noauth ;execargs = lock passive 10.0.1.1:10.0.1.2 local debug noauth pty = yes CAfile = ca.crt cert = server.crt key = server.key verifyChain = yes 2. Stunnel client's configuration ... foreground = yes debug = 7 socket = l:TCP_NODELAY=1 socket = r:TCP_NODELAY=1 ; Session cache sessionCacheSize = 1 sessionCacheTimeout = 600 failover = rr [ppp] client = yes retry = yes connect = REMOTE-IP:PORT exec = /usr/sbin/pppd execargs = defaultroute persist lock passive 10.0.1.2:10.0.1.1 local debug noauth name ppp-client pty = yes CAfile = ca.crt cert = client.crt key = client.key verifyChain = yes checkHost = REMOTE-HOSTNAME ;checkIP = 1.2.3.4

2 1

Stunnel for O365 Sending Some Reports but not Others
by David Schmidt 10 May '19

10 May '19

Hello, We needed to reconfigure Stunnel for the SAP Business Objects server that sent email reports from G Suite over to a configuration that sends from an O365 account. The problem is that some of the reports work fine after the reconfiguration, while others always fail and I can't find out why and nothing has changed other than the mail settings. Microsoft doesn't even see the failed reports hitting their servers but when I look at Stunnel it seems like the TLS connection is being established correctly and I can see the connection being established from our firewall logs. I've attached the current O365 config as well as the old GSuite conifg, as well as logs of the debug output I see when I run a report that succeeds versus a report that fails. Can anyone give me an idea as to why Stunnel seems to be working to send out some reports but not others? Thank you, David Schmidt | Administrateur TI / IT Administrator | MTYGroup.com<http://mtygroup.com/> T+1 514-336-8885 Ext 8236 | C+1 514-708-7299 | 8210, route Transcanadienne, St. Laurent, QC, H4S 1M5 [http://mtygroup.com/signature/gif/use_this_left.gif]<http://mtygroup.com> [http://mtygroup.com/signature/gif/use_this_right.gif] <http://mtygroup.com> AVERTISSEMENT CONCERNANT LA CONFIDENTIALIT? / WARNING CONCERNING CONFIDENTIALITY Ce message peut contenir des informations confidentielles, privil?gi?es, et seulement pour ses destinataires. Si vous avez re?u ce message par erreur, veuillez en informer imm?diatement l'exp?diteur par retour de courriel et supprimer cette communication de votre syst?me. This email message may contain information that is confidential, privileged, and for communication only to its intended recipient or recipients. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete the original message without making a copy.

1 0