- stunnel-users - stunnel.org

Re: [stunnel-users] My home ISP blocking ssh protocol
by Eric Eberhard 13 Dec '19

13 Dec '19

Ditto. Eric -----Original Message----- From: stunnel-users [mailto:stunnel-users-bounces@stunnel.org] On Behalf Of Mike Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 9:08 AM To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org Subject: Re: [stunnel-users] My home ISP blocking ssh protocol On 12/11/2019 5:53 PM, Matt Thomas wrote: > Hello:) > >[snip > > All i am trying to do is have a SFTP server that i can access my dang >files from while i am at school, work, friends house, library or >wherever. >[snip] I run a ssh server on my home network. I configure it to use a port other than port 22. _______________________________________________ stunnel-users mailing list stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org https://www.stunnel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users

1 0

Stunnel-5.55 client close TLS socket before it could read more bytes
by Ming Lu 13 Dec '19

13 Dec '19

Hello, May I please have help on this issue? Thanks in advance! I had a stunnel server and client communicating with TLSv1.2 (both of them are stunnel 5.55 and OpenSSL-1.1.1d) on CentOS 7 based Linux (kernel was updated as 4.19.0). The case is that client sends a HTTP request to server, and then server responds a payload with more than 640KB size. Normally, the server will close the connection by sending an alert firstly. The issue is that sometimes (not 100% reproducible), stunnel client reported: "TLS socket closed (read hangup)". and then closed the TLS socket. So I could find an alert sent from client to server firstly from tcpdump. Consequently, this caused the application reported "unexpected end of input?" as there should be more data to be received. I added a few debug logic and I indeed found that: there were occurrences that if stunnel client did not close the TLS socket, it could read more data from TLS socket in next poll loop: -------------------- 03:59:46 localhost stunnel: LOG6[0]: MingL: POLLRDHUP: 8192 03:59:46 localhost stunnel: LOG6[0]: MingL: ioctlsocket: 0 03:59:46 localhost stunnel: LOG6[0]: MingL: bytes: 0 <== client didn't close the sock in my debug version. 03:59:46 localhost stunnel: LOG6[0]: MingL: after checking 03:59:46 localhost stunnel: LOG6[0]: MingL: s_poll_wait: return 1 03:59:46 localhost stunnel: LOG6[0]: MingL: sock_can_rd: n 03:59:46 localhost stunnel: LOG6[0]: MingL: sock_can_wr: Y 03:59:46 localhost stunnel: LOG6[0]: MingL: ssl_can_rd: n 03:59:46 localhost stunnel: LOG6[0]: MingL: ssl_can_wr: n 03:59:46 localhost stunnel: LOG6[0]: MingL: pending: 1 03:59:46 localhost stunnel: LOG6[0]: MingL: write to sock 18432 03:59:46 localhost stunnel: LOG6[0]: MingL: read_wants_read Y 03:59:46 localhost stunnel: LOG6[0]: MingL: write_wants_writen 03:59:46 localhost stunnel: LOG6[0]: MingL: read from TLS 10168 <== then I observed the further read from TLS. -------------------- Any help will be appreciated! Ming

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] My home ISP blocking ssh protocol
by Christopher Schultz 12 Dec '19

12 Dec '19

Matt, On 12/12/19 13:43, Matt Thomas wrote: > Not sure if you have read the first post, or maybe i didnt add it, but i > have tried port 22,5022,8022, 25565, 47506 and 443 haha. It wasn't clear if you were changing the port number of the sshd service (on your server) or the port you had open on your firewall/router. I suspect that your ISP is blocking incoming connections to port 22. The port number you use for sshd on the server is not relevant. -chris > On Thu, Dec 12, 2019, 9:44 AM Christopher Schultz > <chris(a)christopherschultz.net <mailto:chris@christopherschultz.net>> wrote: > > Matt, > > On 12/12/19 11:01, Matt Thomas wrote: > > Server is 192.168.0.10 > > Router is 192.168.0.1 > > > > It works fine internally:) > > > > I add a port forward in the router for port 22 pointed at .0.10. > Routers > > firewall all ready is configured to accept ssh on port 22 from any > any. > > > > When ever anyone attempts to connect to the server, a pop up shows > on my > > screen. When i try to have my friends or co-workers try from there > house > > or i try from public place, no pop up or hits on the server log. Just > > times out. > > > > But if i put minecraft on port 22, it works. So certain traffic is > > making it through. Even hamachi vpn works fine BUT i cant install that > > on public PC's haha > > I was about to say "this is clearly an issue with the port number, pick > something other than 22" but if you say you can run Minecraft over port > 22, then that's ... strange. > > I wasn't aware that Minecraft servers could have their ports changed > like that. You can really set up your Minecraft server to listen on > localhost:22 and it doesn't use UPnP or anything like that to > reconfigure your firewall/router? > > My advice is to try configuring things like this: > > Router: 192.168.0.1 > Forward WAN connections to port e.g. 1022 -> 192.168.0.10:1022 > <http://192.168.0.10:1022> > > Server: 192.68.0.1 > Accept stunnel connections on port 1022 > accept=:1022 > connect=localhost:22 > > If that works, I might even try just changing the port number of your > ssh/sftp service from the "standard" port to something else and trying > again without stunnel in the mix. > > I've never encountered an ISP which does deep packet inspection to block > services. They usually just block ports. > > -chris > > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2019, 7:58 AM Christopher Schultz > > <chris(a)christopherschultz.net > <mailto:chris@christopherschultz.net> > <mailto:chris@christopherschultz.net > <mailto:chris@christopherschultz.net>>> wrote: > > > > Matt, > > > > On 12/11/19 17:53, Matt Thomas wrote: > > > I need to know if Stunnel is going to accomplish what i need > to do. My > > > home ISP blocks protocol HTTP and SSH from coming in so that > > people cant > > > run their own website from home without paying the ISP for a > > "Business" line > > > > > > All i am trying to do is have a SFTP server that i can > access my dang > > > files from while i am at school, work, friends house, library or > > > wherever. I have tried ssh on multiple random ports and made > sure all > > > firewall rules and port forward rules were correct in my home > > router. I > > > know they work because i even went as far as setting up a > minecraft > > > server to just test the port forward rules out and sure > enough, my > > > friend 200 miles away can connect just fine to my home minecraft > > > server.. But he can not connect to the ssh server. No logs > are ever > > > created on the server either because something is stoping > the packet > > > from even hitting my router, that something is my ISP > > > > > > Would stunnel allow me to make ssh traffic look like regular > https > > > traffic, thus allowing me to connect to my server at home so > i can > > do my > > > homework?? > > > > Those other servers probably use TLS or plaintext connections. > stunnel > > uses TLS, but ssh/sftp use a slightly different protocol that may > > possibly be distinguishable by a determined ISP. > > > > I would think that using stunnel to tunnel SFTP/SSH would be > possible, > > though not strictly necessary. I suspect some other problem is > > preventing you from succeeding. > > > > Can you be more specific about exactly what you did for > configuration? > > Port numbers, specific things you did, etc? You don't have to > disclose > > your public IP address, but perhaps give the local IPs of your > router > > and home server, etc? > > > > -chris > > > > _______________________________________________ > > stunnel-users mailing list > > stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org <mailto:stunnel-users@stunnel.org> > <mailto:stunnel-users@stunnel.org <mailto:stunnel-users@stunnel.org>> > > https://www.stunnel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > stunnel-users mailing list > stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org <mailto:stunnel-users@stunnel.org> > https://www.stunnel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users >

2 1

Re: [stunnel-users] My home ISP blocking ssh protocol
by Christopher Schultz 12 Dec '19

12 Dec '19

Matt, On 12/12/19 11:01, Matt Thomas wrote: > Server is 192.168.0.10 > Router is 192.168.0.1 > > It works fine internally:) > > I add a port forward in the router for port 22 pointed at .0.10. Routers > firewall all ready is configured to accept ssh on port 22 from any any. > > When ever anyone attempts to connect to the server, a pop up shows on my > screen. When i try to have my friends or co-workers try from there house > or i try from public place, no pop up or hits on the server log. Just > times out. > > But if i put minecraft on port 22, it works. So certain traffic is > making it through. Even hamachi vpn works fine BUT i cant install that > on public PC's haha I was about to say "this is clearly an issue with the port number, pick something other than 22" but if you say you can run Minecraft over port 22, then that's ... strange. I wasn't aware that Minecraft servers could have their ports changed like that. You can really set up your Minecraft server to listen on localhost:22 and it doesn't use UPnP or anything like that to reconfigure your firewall/router? My advice is to try configuring things like this: Router: 192.168.0.1 Forward WAN connections to port e.g. 1022 -> 192.168.0.10:1022 Server: 192.68.0.1 Accept stunnel connections on port 1022 accept=:1022 connect=localhost:22 If that works, I might even try just changing the port number of your ssh/sftp service from the "standard" port to something else and trying again without stunnel in the mix. I've never encountered an ISP which does deep packet inspection to block services. They usually just block ports. -chris > On Thu, Dec 12, 2019, 7:58 AM Christopher Schultz > <chris(a)christopherschultz.net <mailto:chris@christopherschultz.net>> wrote: > > Matt, > > On 12/11/19 17:53, Matt Thomas wrote: > > I need to know if Stunnel is going to accomplish what i need to do. My > > home ISP blocks protocol HTTP and SSH from coming in so that > people cant > > run their own website from home without paying the ISP for a > "Business" line > > > > All i am trying to do is have a SFTP server that i can access my dang > > files from while i am at school, work, friends house, library or > > wherever. I have tried ssh on multiple random ports and made sure all > > firewall rules and port forward rules were correct in my home > router. I > > know they work because i even went as far as setting up a minecraft > > server to just test the port forward rules out and sure enough, my > > friend 200 miles away can connect just fine to my home minecraft > > server.. But he can not connect to the ssh server. No logs are ever > > created on the server either because something is stoping the packet > > from even hitting my router, that something is my ISP > > > > Would stunnel allow me to make ssh traffic look like regular https > > traffic, thus allowing me to connect to my server at home so i can > do my > > homework?? > > Those other servers probably use TLS or plaintext connections. stunnel > uses TLS, but ssh/sftp use a slightly different protocol that may > possibly be distinguishable by a determined ISP. > > I would think that using stunnel to tunnel SFTP/SSH would be possible, > though not strictly necessary. I suspect some other problem is > preventing you from succeeding. > > Can you be more specific about exactly what you did for configuration? > Port numbers, specific things you did, etc? You don't have to disclose > your public IP address, but perhaps give the local IPs of your router > and home server, etc? > > -chris > > _______________________________________________ > stunnel-users mailing list > stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org <mailto:stunnel-users@stunnel.org> > https://www.stunnel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users >

2 1

My home ISP blocking ssh protocol
by Matt Thomas 12 Dec '19

12 Dec '19

Hello:) I need to know if Stunnel is going to accomplish what i need to do. My home ISP blocks protocol HTTP and SSH from coming in so that people cant run their own website from home without paying the ISP for a "Business" line All i am trying to do is have a SFTP server that i can access my dang files from while i am at school, work, friends house, library or wherever. I have tried ssh on multiple random ports and made sure all firewall rules and port forward rules were correct in my home router. I know they work because i even went as far as setting up a minecraft server to just test the port forward rules out and sure enough, my friend 200 miles away can connect just fine to my home minecraft server.. But he can not connect to the ssh server. No logs are ever created on the server either because something is stoping the packet from even hitting my router, that something is my ISP Would stunnel allow me to make ssh traffic look like regular https traffic, thus allowing me to connect to my server at home so i can do my homework?? thanks -- My history test question: Give the number of automobiles produced in America during the year of your choice. My answer? 1806: none Matt Thomas GrillofMyDreams.blogspot.com http://slcc.biz.tm

3 2

Re: [stunnel-users] My home ISP blocking ssh protocol
by pepak＠seznam.cz 12 Dec '19

12 Dec '19

Hi! > I need to know if Stunnel is going to accomplish what i need to do. My home > ISP blocks protocol HTTP and SSH from coming in so that people cant run > their own website from home without paying the ISP for a "Business" line [...] > Would stunnel allow me to make ssh traffic look like regular https traffic, > thus allowing me to connect to my server at home so i can do my homework?? Well, yes and no: Yes: Your SSH traffic will be wrapped in the standard TLS protocol, which would make it impossible for the ISP to determine what's inside. They wouldn't be able to determine the actual contents of the traffic, although they could make good guesses based on the packet metadata (direction, size, frequency, time between packets, etc.). But they won't be able to scan packet headers and determine that "hey, this is SSH, let's block it!". No: Part of the answer lies above: using statistical methods, it may be possible to distinguish SSH from something else. The other part lies in the fact that the ISP doesn't really have to do it - if they feel like it, they could e.g. block all incoming traffic unless it is a response to a prior outgoing traffic, or block all incoming traffic unless it can be determined that it is one of a selected few permitted protocols. Likely you won't run into the "No" part of the answer, and in that case Stunnel will serve nicely (I use it in this scenario, myself). But you might. In that case, you may want to use something like TCP/IP Gender Changer (which basically creates a tunnel with reverse directions), either alone or in combination with Stunnel. Pepak

1 0

updated patch for Start TLS for LDAP clients (RFC 2830)
by Seth Grover 10 Dec '19

10 Dec '19

Back in 2013 Bart Dopheide submitted a patch to the mailing list to add LDAP StartTLS (elevate connection to TLS after initial connection is initiated) support to the list of supported protocols in protocol.c ( https://www.stunnel.org/pipermail/stunnel-users/2013-November/004437.html) It doesn't look like this patch was ever accepted into stunnel. I've run into a similar requirement and have updated the patch to work against stunnel 5.56. In addition, there are a few other minor changes, the most significant being as follows. It would appear that Windows Active Directory servers do not implement the ldap extended response PDU in the same way as OpenLDAP (see this thread: https://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-software/200401/msg00800.html) With this patch you can specify either "protocol = winldap" or "protocol = openldap" and have it work either way. I haven't modified the logic of Bart's original patch as far as OpenLDAP goes, but I have split the code path where applicable to handle the Windows case. I am testing this against a virtual Windows Server 2016 Active Directory instance with self-signed certificates with the following config: [stunnel.winldap] client = yes accept = localhost:3268 connect =mymachine.example.com:3268 protocol = winldap And the following ldapsearch command: LDAPTLS_REQCERT=never ldapsearch -Z -h localhost -p 3268 -D "nginx_bind_dn(a)localdomain.lan" -W -b "dc=localdomain,dc=lan" -s sub "objectClass=person" The ldapsearch output returns as expected and I can see in wireshark that the LDAP_START_TLS_OID request/response happens as it should. The patch is at the end of this message. -SG diff -Nurp a/src/protocol.c b/src/protocol.c --- a/src/protocol.c 2019-05-15 13:35:16.000000000 -0600 +++ b/src/protocol.c 2019-12-03 13:54:47.536940900 -0700 @@ -64,6 +64,8 @@ NOEXPORT char *pop3_server(CLI *, SERVIC NOEXPORT char *imap_client(CLI *, SERVICE_OPTIONS *, const PHASE); NOEXPORT char *imap_server(CLI *, SERVICE_OPTIONS *, const PHASE); NOEXPORT char *nntp_client(CLI *, SERVICE_OPTIONS *, const PHASE); +NOEXPORT char *openldap_client(CLI *, SERVICE_OPTIONS *, const PHASE); +NOEXPORT char *winldap_client(CLI *, SERVICE_OPTIONS *, const PHASE); NOEXPORT char *connect_server(CLI *, SERVICE_OPTIONS *, const PHASE); NOEXPORT char *connect_client(CLI *, SERVICE_OPTIONS *, const PHASE); #ifndef OPENSSL_NO_MD4 @@ -113,6 +115,14 @@ char *protocol(CLI *c, SERVICE_OPTIONS * return opt->option.client ? nntp_client(c, opt, phase) : "The 'nntp' protocol is not supported in the server mode"; + if(!strcasecmp(opt->protocol, "openldap")) + return opt->option.client ? + openldap_client(c, opt, phase) : + "The 'openldap' protocol is not supported in the server mode"; + if(!strcasecmp(opt->protocol, "winldap")) + return opt->option.client ? + winldap_client(c, opt, phase) : + "The 'winldap' protocol is not supported in the server mode"; if(!strcasecmp(opt->protocol, "connect")) return opt->option.client ? connect_client(c, opt, phase) : @@ -1119,6 +1129,182 @@ NOEXPORT char *nntp_client(CLI *c, SERVI return NULL; } +/**************************************** LDAP, RFC 2830 */ +uint8_t ldap_startssl_message[0x1d + 2] = +{ + 0x30, /* tag = UNIVERSAL SEQUENCE */ + 0x1d, /* len = 29 (the remaining number of bytes in this message) */ + 0x02, /* messageID */ + 0x01, /* len = 1 */ + 0x01, /* value = 1 (this is messageID 1) */ + /* --- */ + 0x77, /* protocolOp = APPLICATION (23) (=ExtendedRequest) + * 0b01xxxxxx => APPLICATION + * 0bxx1xxxxx => ? + * 0xxxx10111 => 23 + */ + 0x18, /* len = 24 */ + 0x80, /* type = requstName? */ + 0x16, /* len = 22 */ + /* OID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.20037 (=LDAP_START_TLS_OID)*/ + '1', '.', + '3', '.', + '6', '.', + '1', '.', + '4', '.', + '1', '.', + '1', '4', '6', '6', '.', + '2', '0', '0', '3', '7' + /* No requestValue, as per RFC2830 (in 2.1: "The requestValue field is absent") */ +}; + +typedef enum { + LDAP_OPENLDAP, + LDAP_WINLDAP +} LDAP_MODE; + +#define LDAP_UNIVERSAL_SEQUENCE 0x30 +#define LDAP_WINLDAP_FOUR_BYTE_LEN_FLAG 0x84 +#define LDAP_RESPONSE_MSG_ID_TYPE_INT 0x02 +#define LDAP_RESPONSE_EXPECTED_MSG_ID_LEN 0x01 +#define LDAP_RESPONSE_EXPECTED_MSG_ID 0x01 +#define LDAP_RESPONSE_EXT_RESP 0x0a +#define LDAP_RESPONSE_EXT_RESP_APPLICATION 0x78 +#define LDAP_RESPONSE_EXPECTED_ERR_LEN 0x01 +#define LDAP_RESPONSE_SUCCESS 0x00 + +NOEXPORT char *ldap_client(CLI *c, SERVICE_OPTIONS *opt, const PHASE phase, const LDAP_MODE ldap_mode) { + + /* thanks to these threads for help with these PDUs + https://www.stunnel.org/pipermail/stunnel-users/2013-November/004437.html + https://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-software/200401/msg00800.html */ + + uint8_t buffer_8[1]; + uint32_t buffer_32[1]; + uint32_t resp_len; + uint8_t ldap_response[256]; + uint8_t *resp_ptr; + + (void)opt; /* squash the unused parameter warning */ + + if(phase!=PROTOCOL_MIDDLE) + return NULL; + + /* send "Start TLS" request to AD server */ + s_log(LOG_DEBUG, "Requesting LDAP Start TLS"); + s_write(c, c->remote_fd.fd, ldap_startssl_message, (size_t)ldap_startssl_message[1] + 2); + + /* LDAP_UNIVERSAL_SEQUENCE (1 byte) */ + s_read(c, c->remote_fd.fd, buffer_8, 1); + if(buffer_8[0] != LDAP_UNIVERSAL_SEQUENCE) { + s_log(LOG_ERR, "start tag is not UNIVERSAL SEQUENCE"); + throw_exception(c, 1); + } + + if(ldap_mode == LDAP_OPENLDAP) { + /* OpenLDAP - response length (1 byte) */ + s_log(LOG_DEBUG, "Reading OpenLDAP message size (1 byte)"); + s_read(c, c->remote_fd.fd, buffer_8, 1); + resp_len = buffer_8; + + } else if(ldap_mode == LDAP_WINLDAP) { + + /* WinLDAP - "response length is 4 bytes" flag - LDAP_WINLDAP_FOUR_BYTE_LEN_FLAG (1-byte) */ + s_read(c, c->remote_fd.fd, buffer_8, 1); + if(buffer_8[0] != LDAP_WINLDAP_FOUR_BYTE_LEN_FLAG) { + s_log(LOG_ERR, "LDAP message length flag is an unexpected value"); + throw_exception(c, 1); + } + + /* WinLDAP - response length (4 bytes, network byte order) */ + s_log(LOG_DEBUG, "Reading WinLDAP message size (4 bytes)"); + s_read(c, c->remote_fd.fd, buffer_32, 4); + resp_len = ntohl(buffer_32[0]); + + } else { + s_log(LOG_ERR, "Unsupported LDAP mode"); + throw_exception(c, 1); + } + + /* LDAP response message */ + s_log(LOG_DEBUG, "Reading LDAP message (%u byte(s))", resp_len); + s_read(c, c->remote_fd.fd, ldap_response, resp_len); + + resp_ptr = &ldap_response[0]; + + /* LDAP_RESPONSE_MSG_ID_TYPE_INT - 1 byte */ + if(*resp_ptr != LDAP_RESPONSE_MSG_ID_TYPE_INT) { + s_log(LOG_ERR, "LDAP response has an incorrect message ID type"); + throw_exception(c, 1); + } + resp_ptr++; + + /* LDAP_RESPONSE_EXPECTED_MSG_ID_LEN - 1 byte */ + if(*resp_ptr != LDAP_RESPONSE_EXPECTED_MSG_ID_LEN) { + s_log(LOG_ERR, "LDAP response has an unexpected message ID length"); + throw_exception(c, 1); + } + resp_ptr++; + + /* LDAP_RESPONSE_EXPECTED_MSG_ID - 1 byte */ + if(*resp_ptr != LDAP_RESPONSE_EXPECTED_MSG_ID) { + s_log(LOG_ERR, "LDAP response has an unexpected message ID"); + throw_exception(c, 1); + } + resp_ptr++; + + /* LDAP_RESPONSE_EXT_RESP_APPLICATION - 1 byte */ + if(*resp_ptr != LDAP_RESPONSE_EXT_RESP_APPLICATION) { + s_log(LOG_ERR, "LDAP response protocolOp is not APPLICATION"); + throw_exception(c, 1); + } + resp_ptr++; + + if(ldap_mode == LDAP_WINLDAP) { + /* WinLDAP - "response length is 4 bytes" flag - LDAP_WINLDAP_FOUR_BYTE_LEN_FLAG (1-byte) */ + if(*resp_ptr != LDAP_WINLDAP_FOUR_BYTE_LEN_FLAG) { + s_log(LOG_ERR, "LDAP extendedResp length flag is an unexpected value"); + throw_exception(c, 1); + } + /* WinLDAP - extended response message length (4-bytes) */ + resp_ptr += 5; + + } else { + /* OpenLDAP - extended response message length (1-byte) */ + resp_ptr++; + } + + /* LDAP_RESPONSE_EXT_RESP - 1 byte */ + if(*resp_ptr != LDAP_RESPONSE_EXT_RESP) { + s_log(LOG_ERR, "LDAP response type is not EXT_RESP"); + throw_exception(c, 1); + } + resp_ptr++; + + /* LDAP_RESPONSE_EXT_RESP - 1 byte */ + if(*resp_ptr != LDAP_RESPONSE_EXPECTED_ERR_LEN) { + s_log(LOG_ERR, "LDAP response has an unexpected error code length"); + throw_exception(c, 1); + } + resp_ptr++; + + if(*resp_ptr != LDAP_RESPONSE_SUCCESS) { + s_log(LOG_ERR, "LDAP response has indicated an error (%u)", *resp_ptr); + throw_exception(c, 1); + } + + return NULL; +} + + +NOEXPORT char *openldap_client(CLI *c, SERVICE_OPTIONS *opt, const PHASE phase) { + return ldap_client(c, opt, phase, LDAP_OPENLDAP); +} + +NOEXPORT char *winldap_client(CLI *c, SERVICE_OPTIONS *opt, const PHASE phase) { + return ldap_client(c, opt, phase, LDAP_WINLDAP); +} + /**************************************** connect */ NOEXPORT char *connect_server(CLI *c, SERVICE_OPTIONS *opt, const PHASE phase) {

1 1

Stunnel - supports static OpenSSL engines?
by pepak＠seznam.cz 10 Dec '19

10 Dec '19

Hi! Does Stunnel support static-linked engines for OpenSSL? From my experiments, my guess would be that it doesn't, but I may be overlooking something and would welcome a confirmation. Why I need it: During development of an urelated app, after many many failed attempts, I finally managed to get OpenSSL 1.1.x working with a CAPI engine - but the only functional setup involved CAPI built directly into libcrypto. Every other setup, in both Visual Studio and MinGW, led to some problem or another. I would love to extend this success to my Stunnel setup, where I am now forced to stick with version 5.49 because the newer versions use OpenSSL 1.1.x which simply doesn't seem to be able to function correctly with the dynamic CAPI engine. What I need from Stunnel, basically, is for it to try to use ENGINE_by_id('capi') first and only when that fails, attempt to load a dynamic engine using ENGINE_by_id('dynamic') and the necessary ENGINE_ctrl_cmd_string commands. I can build a functional static-built OpenSSL libraries myself. If Stunnel wanted to incorporate that, I am all for it, provided that there is some way of specifying whether a static engine or a dynamic engine is preferred. My Configure command is: perl Configure shared enable-static-engine enable-zlib --with-zlib-include=C:\Zlib --with-zlib-lib=C:\Zlib\zlib.lib VC-WIN64A Pepak

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] stunnel 5.55 - - - SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected
by Flo Rance 06 Dec '19

06 Dec '19

The full logs of both sides would still be useful. Regards, Flo On Fri, 6 Dec 2019 at 09:48, simona vittori <svittori(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > port 41521 is the port of stunnel server istance that then redirect > connection in clear on port 1521 of the listener. > > That's all > > Thanks > > Simona > > Il giorno ven 6 dic 2019 alle ore 09:37 Flo Rance <trourance(a)gmail.com> > ha scritto: > >> Hi, >> >> The full logs of the client would be useful. >> >> What are you trying to connect to (on port 41521) ? >> >> Regards, >> Flo >> >> On Thu, 5 Dec 2019 at 12:44, simona vittori <svittori(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I have stunnel v 5.55 on linux machine client e linux machine db server, >>> Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.6. I have noticed that there are >>> many many diconnections by side client (at the bottom of the page). Why >>> there is this behavior? >>> >>> This is the configuration file of client machine: >>> >>> cert = /opt/stunnel-5.55/etc/stunnel/stunnel.pem >>> verify = 3 >>> setuid = stunnel >>> >>> CAfile = /opt/stunnel-5.55/var/certs.pem >>> >>> pid = /opt/stunnel-5.55/var/lib/stunnel/stunnel_client.pid >>> >>> socket = l:TCP_NODELAY=1 >>> socket = r:TCP_NODELAY=1 >>> >>> sslVersion = TLSv1 >>> >>> TIMEOUTconnect = 30 >>> failover = rr >>> >>> ciphers = ECDH@STRENGTH:DH@STRENGTH:HIGH:!RC4:!MD5:!DES:!aNULL:!eNULL >>> >>> debug = 7 >>> output = /opt/stunnel-5.55/var/stunnel.log >>> >>> client = yes >>> >>> [connessione_a_EMPRMDB1-DB2] >>> accept=127.0.0.1:10001 >>> connect=10.56.213.70:41521 >>> connect=10.56.213.72:41521 >>> >>> >>> ####################################################################################### >>> >>> Dec 5 12:31:42 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15001]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> Dec 5 12:31:52 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15007]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> Dec 5 12:32:13 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15013]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> Dec 5 12:32:13 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15014]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> Dec 5 12:32:22 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15019]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> Dec 5 12:32:23 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15021]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> Dec 5 12:32:23 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15023]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> Dec 5 12:32:24 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15024]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> Dec 5 12:32:44 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15033]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> Dec 5 12:32:45 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15035]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> Dec 5 12:32:55 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15041]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> Dec 5 12:34:04 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15062]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> Dec 5 12:34:05 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15063]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> Dec 5 12:34:06 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15065]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> Dec 5 12:34:18 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15069]: SSL_connect: Peer >>> suddenly disconnected >>> >>> #####################################################################à >>> >>> Thank for your help >>> >>> Simona >>> _______________________________________________ >>> stunnel-users mailing list >>> stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org >>> https://www.stunnel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users >>> >>

1 0

stunnel 5.55 - - - SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected
by simona vittori 06 Dec '19

06 Dec '19

Hello, I have stunnel v 5.55 on linux machine client e linux machine db server, Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.6. I have noticed that there are many many diconnections by side client (at the bottom of the page). Why there is this behavior? This is the configuration file of client machine: cert = /opt/stunnel-5.55/etc/stunnel/stunnel.pem verify = 3 setuid = stunnel CAfile = /opt/stunnel-5.55/var/certs.pem pid = /opt/stunnel-5.55/var/lib/stunnel/stunnel_client.pid socket = l:TCP_NODELAY=1 socket = r:TCP_NODELAY=1 sslVersion = TLSv1 TIMEOUTconnect = 30 failover = rr ciphers = ECDH@STRENGTH:DH@STRENGTH:HIGH:!RC4:!MD5:!DES:!aNULL:!eNULL debug = 7 output = /opt/stunnel-5.55/var/stunnel.log client = yes [connessione_a_EMPRMDB1-DB2] accept=127.0.0.1:10001 connect=10.56.213.70:41521 connect=10.56.213.72:41521 ####################################################################################### Dec 5 12:31:42 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15001]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected Dec 5 12:31:52 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15007]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected Dec 5 12:32:13 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15013]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected Dec 5 12:32:13 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15014]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected Dec 5 12:32:22 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15019]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected Dec 5 12:32:23 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15021]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected Dec 5 12:32:23 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15023]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected Dec 5 12:32:24 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15024]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected Dec 5 12:32:44 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15033]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected Dec 5 12:32:45 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15035]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected Dec 5 12:32:55 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15041]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected Dec 5 12:34:04 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15062]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected Dec 5 12:34:05 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15063]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected Dec 5 12:34:06 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15065]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected Dec 5 12:34:18 EMWBPAPP2b stunnel: []:LOG3[15069]: SSL_connect: Peer suddenly disconnected #####################################################################à Thank for your help Simona

2 1