stunnel-users

stunnel-users@stunnel.org

6 participants
3294 discussions

Start a nNew thread

none cipher
by Mark Sullivan 09 Jun '14

09 Jun '14

How can I use the none cipher with SSL? which ciphers allow for the best throughput?

2 1

stunnel 5.02 released
by Michal Trojnara 09 Jun '14

09 Jun '14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Dear Users, I have released version 5.02 of stunnel. The ChangeLog entry: Version 5.02, 2014.06.09, urgency: HIGH: * Security bugfixes - OpenSSL DLLs updated to version 1.0.1h. See http://www.openssl.org/news/secadv_20140605.txt * New features - Major rewrite of the protocol.c interface: it is now possible to add protocol negotiations at multiple connection phases, protocols can individually decide whether the remote connection will be established before or after SSL/TLS is negotiated. - Heap memory blocks are wiped before release. This only works for block allocated by stunnel, and not by OpenSSL or other libraries. - The safe_memcmp() function implemented with execution time not dependent on the compared data. - Updated the stunnel.conf and stunnel.init templates. - Added a client-mode example to the manual. * Bugfixes - Fixed "failover = rr" broken since version 5.00. - Fixed "taskbar = no" broken since version 5.00. - Compilation fix for missing SSL_OP_MSIE_SSLV2_RSA_PADDING option. Home page: https://www.stunnel.org/ Download: https://www.stunnel.org/downloads.html SHA-256 hashes: c258b71d7f82bba5b0a4ccc69fbda632f1fefe9108589a92aa1016f33985973e stunnel-5.02.tar.gz 2125bf8e9241cb9f7969cb74f8409ce77f2c49e1390d363aa46bc436b9d908aa stunnel-5.02-installer.exe f962a2f4a0e16f07ff10339066ec89d7686734dcabba88654f2e71da4f658529 stunnel-5.02-android.zip Best regards, Mike -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlOVrZkACgkQ/NU+nXTHMtHBIQCfefzazgvECg8p4qoHgsMjw/KM gTQAoM0mYm+S7exolJjiBBfSlx2G8Rjn =hyr4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

OpenSSL dlls update for Windows (security advisory 20140605)
by Javier 07 Jun '14

07 Jun '14

Hi, as a mere user I ask, should we expect a new Stunnel version in a few days even it is not an Stunnel vulnerability or is it enough to just update ssleay and libeay with 1.0.1h by us under Windows? Just in case ssleay and libeay are compiled different than official builds. Regards. http://www.openssl.org/news/secadv_20140605.txt

1 0

behavior change after enabling proxy protocol
by Philippe Anctil 05 Jun '14

05 Jun '14

Hello, We use stunnel to secure a proprietary tcp/ip protocol over the internet. More specifially we have - 1 balancer - 2 stunnel boxes - 1 app server The load balancer 'pings' stunnel boxes regularly to know if one is down. Recently, we have added support for the proxy protocol in our app and turned it on in our stunnel config. It works great except for one small new behavior: upon receiving a load balancer ping, stunnel performs a connection on our app (and sends the proxy header). I ran a tcpdump for a telnet on the stunnel port (8000). With proxy protocol disabled, stunnel does nothing while it waits for the certificate. The connection ended at my request. 17:33:08.537385 IP 127.0.0.1.6015 > 127.0.0.1.8000: S 356922015:356922015(0) win 32792 <mss 16396,sackOK,timestamp 1085620573 0,nop,wscale 7> 17:33:08.537386 IP 127.0.0.1.8000 > 127.0.0.1.6015: S 1525966521:1525966521(0) ack 356922016 win 32768 <mss 16396,sackOK,timestamp 1085620573 1085620573,nop,wscale 7> 17:33:08.537393 IP 127.0.0.1.6015 > 127.0.0.1.8000: . ack 1 win 257 <nop,nop,timestamp 1085620573 1085620573> 17:33:19.750431 IP 127.0.0.1.6015 > 127.0.0.1.8000: F 1:1(0) ack 1 win 257 <nop,nop,timestamp 1085631785 1085620573> 17:33:19.751065 IP 127.0.0.1.8000 > 127.0.0.1.6015: . ack 2 win 256 <nop,nop,timestamp 1085631786 1085631785> 17:33:19.751794 IP 127.0.0.1.8000 > 127.0.0.1.6015: R 1:1(0) ack 2 win 256 <nop,nop,timestamp 1085631787 1085631785> With proxy protocol enabled, stunnel establishes a connection to my app and sends the proxy protocol before even receiving the certificate. 17:34:35.370462 IP 127.0.0.1.6026 > 127.0.0.1.8000: S 2949098861:2949098861(0) win 32792 <mss 16396,sackOK,timestamp 1085707402 0,nop,wscale 7> 17:34:35.370475 IP 127.0.0.1.8000 > 127.0.0.1.6026: S 1044893129:1044893129(0) ack 2949098862 win 32768 <mss 16396,sackOK,timestamp 1085707402 1085707402,nop,wscale 7> 17:34:35.370481 IP 127.0.0.1.6026 > 127.0.0.1.8000: . ack 1 win 257 <nop,nop,timestamp 1085707402 1085707402> 17:34:35.371035 IP 127.0.0.1.37654 > 127.0.0.1.9000: S 801705083:801705083(0) win 32792 <mss 16396,sackOK,timestamp 1085707402 0,nop,wscale 7> 17:34:35.371046 IP 127.0.0.1.9000 > 127.0.0.1.37654: S 4068822820:4068822820(0) ack 801705084 win 32768 <mss 16396,sackOK,timestamp 1085707402 1085707402,nop,wscale 7> 17:34:35.371052 IP 127.0.0.1.37654 > 127.0.0.1.9000: . ack 1 win 257 <nop,nop,timestamp 1085707402 1085707402> 17:34:35.371583 IP 127.0.0.1.37654 > 127.0.0.1.9000: P 1:44(43) ack 1 win 257 <nop,nop,timestamp 1085707403 1085707402> 17:34:35.371595 IP 127.0.0.1.9000 > 127.0.0.1.37654: . ack 44 win 256 <nop,nop,timestamp 1085707403 1085707403> 17:34:50.484991 IP 127.0.0.1.9000 > 127.0.0.1.37654: F 1:1(0) ack 44 win 256 <nop,nop,timestamp 1085722515 1085707403> 17:34:50.485892 IP 127.0.0.1.37654 > 127.0.0.1.9000: . ack 2 win 257 <nop,nop,timestamp 1085722516 1085722515> 17:35:08.824661 IP 127.0.0.1.6026 > 127.0.0.1.8000: F 1:1(0) ack 1 win 257 <nop,nop,timestamp 1085740854 1085707402> 17:35:08.824906 IP 127.0.0.1.8000 > 127.0.0.1.6026: . ack 2 win 256 <nop,nop,timestamp 1085740854 1085740854> 17:35:08.824972 IP 127.0.0.1.37654 > 127.0.0.1.9000: R 44:44(0) ack 2 win 257 <nop,nop,timestamp 1085740854 1085722515> 17:35:08.825013 IP 127.0.0.1.8000 > 127.0.0.1.6026: R 1:1(0) ack 2 win 256 <nop,nop,timestamp 1085740855 1085740854> Note I used 'tcpdump -i lo -nn port 8000 or port 9000' for both traces. I see no good reason to connect to the application before the ssl session is established. Thank you for reading! -- Philippe Anctil

2 2

log format
by Philippe Anctil 04 Jun '14

04 Jun '14

I have noticed stunnel 5.01 log format is different when I run it under my account vs when I run it on the system. I don't remember seeing this with stunnel 4.56 and older. Format under my account: 2014.06.02 11:38:50 LOG6[26855]: SSL accepted: new session negotiated Format on the system: Jun 4 16:27:14 hostname stunnel: LOG6[11100:0]: SSL accepted: new session negotiated When I run under my account I normally save output to a separate file with output=. I guess this is what is having an influence on the log format? Is there any way I can have logging format in my account consistent with what I have in syslog? Thanks. -- Philippe Anctil

1 0

Problem with pidfile
by reg14＠rambler.ru 30 May '14

30 May '14

I run stunnel (version 5.00) as a non-root user which does not have write permissions to /var/run. So I created file /var/run/stunnel.log with right access for that user -rw-r--r--. 1 stunnel stunnel 0 May 28 21:31 stunnel.pid When I start daemon, it writes to logfile the following 2014.05.28 22:18:44 LOG3[8878]: Cannot create pid file /var/run/stunnel.pid 2014.05.28 22:18:44 LOG3[8878]: create: File exists (17) It seems that it tries to create pidfile in /var/run, and ignores that the file is already exists. As a result, pid is not written to stunnel.pid, and daemon crashes. Could this be fixed?

3 7

Possible Mail Relay (port 465/tcp-SSL) after stunnel install
by Sven Schulte 28 May '14

28 May '14

Dear colleagues, after installing stunnel (v 5.01) an PCI Security Scan finished with finding that port 465 allows mail relaying. (CVE-1999-0512, CVE-2002-1278, CVE-2003-0285). Any comments/ideas how to comly? Thanks in advance! Sven

1 0

Strange performance problem, need help troubleshooting
by Paulo Azevedo 24 May '14

24 May '14

I have a strange performance problem with stunnel, could you help me? Here is my setup: PC1 & PC2 -- Switch (GbE) -- Switch (100mbps) -- Router -- modem -- Internet PC1 has stunnel and HFS installed, sharing a folder to the internet.My internet upload speed is 20Mbps. With this setup, I can serve files at 8Mbps over the internet, but if I disable stunnel the speed doubles to 16Mbps. However, with stunnel active, if I try the same with PC2, I get 82Mbps (using the internet IP, it goes all the way to the router), so this does not appear to be a performance problem on the hardware. Can you give me some hints on what is limiting my speed here?

2 1

[patch] Systemd socket activation support in daemon mode
by Mark Theunissen 14 May '14

14 May '14

Hi, This patch allows stunnel to be started in daemon mode by systemd's socket activation. This is superior to inetd mode, for all the reasons specified in the stunnel howto. Since systemd is now the default in most of the major Linux distros, it would be great to have this committed upstream. https://gist.github.com/marktheunissen/7ce9426e66aa8f0ec2e1 Example systemd unit files: ### stunnel.socket [Unit] Description=Stunnel socket After=network.target [Socket] ListenStream=9999 ### stunnel.service [Unit] Description=Stunnel service After=network.target [Service] Type=forking ExecStart=stunnel /etc/stunnel/stunnel.conf Thanks, Mark Theunissen

1 1

Re: [stunnel-users] certificate verify failed
by Aaron Haywood 05 May '14

05 May '14

The following is an excerpt from my log's slightly modified to hide company specific data: 2014.05.01 10:11:05 LOG7[5956]: Starting certificate verification: depth=2, subject=/C=US/O=The Go Daddy Group, Inc./OU=Go Daddy Class 2 Certification Authority 2014.05.01 10:11:05 LOG6[5956]: Certificate accepted: depth=2, subject=/C=US/O=The Go Daddy Group, Inc./OU=Go Daddy Class 2 Certification Authority 2014.05.01 10:11:05 LOG7[5956]: Starting certificate verification: depth=1, subject=/C=US/ST=Arizona/L=Scottsdale/O=GoDaddy.com, Inc./OU=http://certificates.godaddy.com/repository/CN=Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority/serialNumber=######## 2014.05.01 10:11:05 LOG6[5956]: Certificate accepted: depth=1, subject=/C=US/ST=Arizona/L=Scottsdale/O=GoDaddy.com, Inc./OU=http://certificates.godaddy.com/repository/CN=Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority/serialNumber=######## 2014.05.01 10:11:05 LOG7[5956]: Starting certificate verification: depth=0, subject=/O=*.somedomain.com/OU=Domain Control Validated/CN=*.somedomain.com 2014.05.01 10:11:05 LOG3[5956]: CERT: X509_STORE_get1_certs: Peer suddenly disconnected 2014.05.01 10:11:05 LOG4[5956]: Certificate check failed: depth=0, subject=/O=*.somedomain.com/OU=Domain Control Validated/CN=*.somedomain.com 2014.05.01 10:11:05 LOG7[5956]: SSL alert (write): fatal: certificate unknown Respectfully, Aaron Haywood | Systems Administrator [cid:image002.png@01CEDA11.E935A7F0] O: 858.614.1547 | M: 858.699.8302 | www.sdhealthconnect.org CONNECT WITH US: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/SDHealthConnect?filter=1> | Twitter<https://twitter.com/SDHealthConnect> | LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/san-diego-health-connect?trk=company_logo> | Google+<https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/112077458420951237937/112077458420951237937/p…> | YouTube<http://www.youtube.com/SDHealthConnect>

1 0

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

stunnel-users