stunnel-users June 2019

stunnel-users@stunnel.org

14 participants
23 discussions

Problem with pkcs11
by Heinsbroek, Peter 25 Jun '19

25 Jun '19

Hallo everybody. I’m running Stunnel 5.44 with pkcs11 on windows ,with the use of a HSM containing the private keys. That’s working fine. Now I want to upgrade to 5.55,so from 32 bit to 64 bit. I replaced the 32 bit cryptoki with a 64 bit cryptoki. But now it isn’t working. I looked with sysinternals ,and it seems the hsm login isn’t working. I also placed the 64bit ssleay32 & libeap32 in the windows\system32 folder. Did I forget something? If anyone can help ,it’s highly appreciated. 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

last version of stunnel that works on Windows XP
by David Yunker 25 Jun '19

25 Jun '19

What is the last version of stunnel that works on Windows XP? Thank you.

1 0

Latest Stunnel for Windows XP
by David Yunker 24 Jun '19

24 Jun '19

To whom it may concern, What was the last version of stunnel that worked on Windows XP? Thanks for the info.

2 1

SOLVED, I cannot get Outlook Express email to work after Cox changes
by David Yunker 22 Jun '19

22 Jun '19

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.

1 0

Help, I cannot get Outlook Express email to work after Cox changes
by David Yunker 21 Jun '19

21 Jun '19

To anybody who can help, I am currently using Stunnel version 5.24. I cannot update it to the latest version because I am using it on a Windows XP system. My problem is that I am currently using COX for my internet provider and COX recently change the email protocol from SSL to TSL. This is a problem since I am currently using Outlook Express v6 and it does not work with TSL. I recently discovered your Stunnel program and believe it will solve my problem. I tried changing the items in the configuration file to the following: fips = yes [cox-pop3] client = yes accept = 127.0.0.1:995 connect = pop.cox.net:995 verify = 2 CAfile = ca-certs.pem checkHost = pop.cox.net OCSPaia = yes Stunnel shows no errors but my email still does not work. This is what happens when setting up the configuration for Outlook express: My POP account is pop.cox.net. My SMTP account is smtp.cox.net. If I set the POP port to 110 and leave the SMTP port to 25 and I have checked "logon using secure password authentication". But I do NOT have checked "this server requires a secure connection (SSL)". Then when I attempt to send/receive I get the following error: "Unable to logon to the server using secure password authentication account 'pop.cox.net server ...." If I do check "this server requires a secure connection (SSL)" and leave the POP port to 110 then when I attempt to send/receive I get the following error: "Your server has unexpectedly terminated the connection ..." If I change the POP port from 110 to 995 and remove the check mark for "this server require a secure connection (SSL)". Then when I attempt to send/receive I get a time out condition. If I check "this server requires a secure connection (SSL)" and attempt a send/receive I get this error: "Your server has unexpectedly terminated the connection.." No matter how I configure my Outlook Express I do not receive any email. I have a friend who has a Windows 7 system and a virtual windows xp installed in it that he uses for his email but is using Outlook in windows xp and this same configuration works fine for him. Except he has to have "verify = 2" removed from the configuration for Stunnel and his SMTP port is 587. For it to work. What am I doing wrong? Please help!

2 1

Re: [stunnel-users] stunnel client: accept on connect success
by Eric Eberhard 19 Jun '19

19 Jun '19

I'm a dummy so what I do is write a "wrapper" -- you connect to your wrapper and manage your problem. If all is good exec stunnel. If not send appropriate messages back. Dummy idea, Eric -----Original Message----- From: stunnel-users [mailto:stunnel-users-bounces@stunnel.org] On Behalf Of mihertz(a)gmx.de Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2019 11:19 PM To: stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org Subject: [stunnel-users] stunnel client: accept on connect success Hi everyone, could use some help for a stunnel client-mode question. Found no corresponding config directives in the manpage, not sure i am searching with the correct terms... or going for the correct approach at all. So there is a scenario where the stunnel client plaintext side does the tcp-handshake (S/S./.) and directly terminates the connected client afterwards (R.). This is caused because the corresponding connect-target fails to establish a TCP/TLS connection with the server (rejected by target server for whatever reason). This could cause a first regular tcp-packet to be send and lost, before stunnel disconnects on the plaintext-side and the application becomes aware of that eventually. I wonder if there is a way to configure stunnel to behave in a similar way to haproxy /w acl? Where it denies all tcp connects unless at least 1 backend server is available. So that stunnel would like "delay" the accept-side TCP handshake while trying to connect to the connect-side via TLS. Based on TCP/TLS success/failure on the connect-side then continues the accept-side TCP handshake or quits its. This way the client would never have the short moment of "ok, i can start" I know that this behaviour is not optimal/desired with the majority of cases, just have the impression I have a use-case for this in my scenario. There is no way to modify the plaintext-side connected application in any way. Tx/Rx data is just a few bytes, so its always 1 packet for requests/answers. And relatively often that first packet sent goes out before the reset (R.) is received by the stunnel client-mode to the software connected on the accept-side. Would be happy for your input and ideas on how to work around that. Best Regards Michael _______________________________________________ stunnel-users mailing list stunnel-users(a)stunnel.org https://www.stunnel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users

1 0

stunnel client: accept on connect success
by mihertz＠gmx.de 19 Jun '19

19 Jun '19

Hi everyone, could use some help for a stunnel client-mode question. Found no corresponding config directives in the manpage, not sure i am searching with the correct terms... or going for the correct approach at all. So there is a scenario where the stunnel client plaintext side does the tcp-handshake (S/S./.) and directly terminates the connected client afterwards (R.). This is caused because the corresponding connect-target fails to establish a TCP/TLS connection with the server (rejected by target server for whatever reason). This could cause a first regular tcp-packet to be send and lost, before stunnel disconnects on the plaintext-side and the application becomes aware of that eventually. I wonder if there is a way to configure stunnel to behave in a similar way to haproxy /w acl? Where it denies all tcp connects unless at least 1 backend server is available. So that stunnel would like "delay" the accept-side TCP handshake while trying to connect to the connect-side via TLS. Based on TCP/TLS success/failure on the connect-side then continues the accept-side TCP handshake or quits its. This way the client would never have the short moment of "ok, i can start" I know that this behaviour is not optimal/desired with the majority of cases, just have the impression I have a use-case for this in my scenario. There is no way to modify the plaintext-side connected application in any way. Tx/Rx data is just a few bytes, so its always 1 packet for requests/answers. And relatively often that first packet sent goes out before the reset (R.) is received by the stunnel client-mode to the software connected on the accept-side. Would be happy for your input and ideas on how to work around that. Best Regards Michael

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] stunnel-users Digest, Vol 179, Issue 5
by Brent Kimberley 16 Jun '19

16 Jun '19

>> Is there something missing ? Can you please elaborate? https://www.stunnel.org/auth.html Subject: Using STunnel4 with both SSL/TLS proxy AND PSK authentication Hi, all. We've got a specific use case where we need to implement an stunnel4 'tunnel' in the following format: Client <---> client-side stunnel4 <---> server-side stunnel4 <---> server The specific case for this is because of a server that does NOT support SSL on the remote side nor client side, and we need to use two stunnel4 instances to establish the "secure" tunnel. We can get it working with straight SSL/TLS certificates for a secure connection between the two but can't seem to add authentication to this, we want to get the stunnel4 on the client side and the stunnel4 on the server side to have to have some kind of authentication/exchange between them. Whenever we add the PSK options or client certs to the thing, we immediately get SSL/TLS problems, as it doesn't seem to support SSL/TLS handshakes properly at that point. Is there something I'm missing within the STunnel4 documentation about establishing the SSL/TLS tunnel AND adding an authentication component, or is this not possible?? It doesn't currently seem possible based on my testing... Thomas

2 2

Stunnel 5.55 on Win 10 x64 GUI Mode
by Thomas Eifert 16 Jun '19

16 Jun '19

Tonight, I downloaded and installed Stunnel version 5.55 and installed it on Windows 10 x64 1903. If I run Stunnel as a service, everything works beautifully. No issues whatsoever. However, I just can't seem to get it to run in GUI mode. When I fire up the GUI, the configuration file loads fine with no errors. However, when attempting to establish any connection, the GUI simply crashes and the log file just terminates with nothing revealing: 2019.06.15 20:26:02 LOG7[main]: Service [ircs.3] accepted (FD=956) from 127.0.0.1:52874 2019.06.15 20:26:02 LOG7[main]: Creating a new thread 2019.06.15 20:26:02 LOG7[main]: New thread created 2019.06.15 20:26:02 LOG7[0]: Service [ircs.3] started 2019.06.15 20:26:02 LOG7[0]: Setting local socket options (FD=956) 2019.06.15 20:26:02 LOG7[0]: Option TCP_NODELAY set on local socket 2019.06.15 20:26:02 LOG5[0]: Service [ircs.3] accepted connection from 127.0.0.1:52874 2019.06.15 20:26:02 LOG6[0]: s_connect: connecting 154.35.138.250:6697 2019.06.15 20:26:02 LOG7[0]: s_connect: s_poll_wait 154.35.138.250:6697: waiting 10 seconds 2019.06.15 20:26:02 LOG7[0]: FD=1080 ifds=rwx ofds=--- (end of log) This is, of course, with the service stopped and de-installed. I've tried several remedies, including running Stunnel in compatibility modes, running it as an administrator, and I even tried to install it completely outside of the normal "program files (x86)" location. Also, the firewall is not the issue. Nothing seems to help. I can't figure out what on earth is occurring. Any insight/ideas would be appreciated. Thanks and regards, Thomas -- Attention: This message and all attachments are private and may contain information that is confidential and privileged. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the message immediately.

1 1

Using STunnel4 with both SSL/TLS proxy AND PSK authentication
by Thomas Ward 14 Jun '19

14 Jun '19

Hi, all. We've got a specific use case where we need to implement an stunnel4 'tunnel' in the following format: Client <---> client-side stunnel4 <---> server-side stunnel4 <---> server The specific case for this is because of a server that does NOT support SSL on the remote side nor client side, and we need to use two stunnel4 instances to establish the "secure" tunnel. We can get it working with straight SSL/TLS certificates for a secure connection between the two but can't seem to add authentication to this, we want to get the stunnel4 on the client side and the stunnel4 on the server side to have to have some kind of authentication/exchange between them. Whenever we add the PSK options or client certs to the thing, we immediately get SSL/TLS problems, as it doesn't seem to support SSL/TLS handshakes properly at that point. Is there something I'm missing within the STunnel4 documentation about establishing the SSL/TLS tunnel AND adding an authentication component, or is this not possible? It doesn't currently seem possible based on my testing... Thomas

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

stunnel-users June 2019