Well, about doc, stunnel is not so bad, Mike is updating the doc regularly, but stunnel requires some pre-requisites about networking, SSL, certificates and so on...
Presently, about doc, there is an open, passionated, discussion about the friendly project openssl... You may have a look at it...
Anyway, in the documentation pages of the stunnel website, one maybe of interest for you to have a good overview of stunnel and how to configure it quickly.
http://linuxgazette.net/107/odonovan.html
See you, good luck, Pierre
Le 18/11/2012 12:25, Hal Hovland a écrit :
Pierre,
Many, many thanks.
I was labouring under the misapprehension that stunnel did indeed to by what you called 'transparent proxying' and that a sender did not need modifying. In the end it was easy, but, as you said, I had to change my sender (and my thinking) to send to the port that stunnel was expecting local input on. That was all!
A piece of ultimately useful software like stunnel deserves a first class 'User Guide' :)
Glass of wine on me.
Regards, Hal
-----Original Message----- From: Pierre DELAAGE [mailto:delaage.pierre@free.fr] Sent: 17 November 2012 16:05 To: Hal Hovland Cc: stunnel-users@stunnel.org Subject: Re: [stunnel-users] Problem using stunnel on Windows 7
Hmm, my post about ip adresses was to mention that in YOUR CLIENT APPLICATION (forget stunnel config, this was not my purpose), you have to specify : [SENDER STUNNEL] MACHINE ADDRESS as "remote address" (of course it is a fake, because you need to put stunnel in the middle of your traditional communication scheme). INSTEAD of 192.168.1.9... well...that does mean your sender apps TrIES to connect to LOCAL stunnel on address 127.0.0.1
This is the app that you have to modify also ! not only stunnel.
Stunnel is not acting as transparent if you do not modify your apps ! and even though, "transparent" proxying is something else in stunnel that does not fit your needs.
AND in your SERVER APPLICATION (on machine 192.168.1.9), you have to LISTEN on calls coming from ....the local stunnel, on the server machine. (machine 127.0.0.1).
and check your firewall...
Pierre
Le 17/11/2012 13:28, Hal Hovland a écrit :
Pierre, thanks for response. I did try 127.0.0.1 with all the local ports during my testing. I will, though, re-examine my logic as per your
comments.
Its more than possible too, that I've mixed up the definition of 'accept' and 'connect' as used with a server and client - I'm assuming that on the client, the 'accept' defines the port used by the underlying program (here, the Sender), and on the server, the 'connect' defines the port used by the underlying program (here, the Listener)
Drawing a little picture - before the use of stunnel
192.168.1.9| |192.168.1.158 | | Listener | Network | Sender Port|8000 7999|Port
After the introduction of stunnel on both machines
Listener | Network | Sender ^ | | V Port 8000 | | Port 7999 (accept=) stunnel | | stunnel Port|8001 < < 8001|Port |accept= connect=|
[Listener] client=yes [sender] connect=8000 accept = 7999 accept=8001 connect = 192.168.1.9:8001
My biggest worry was that no matter what, hovering over either stunnel icon both shows '0 session(s) active'. Do they only show as active when encrypted communication occurs or when a program is started that uses the relevant port?
Regards, Hal
-----Original Message----- From: Pierre DELAAGE [mailto:delaage.pierre@free.fr] Sent: 17 November 2012 11:31 To: stunnel-users@stunnel.org; hhovland@btconnect.com Subject: Re: [stunnel-users] Problem using stunnel on Windows 7
Hmm, are you sure you are respecting the simple following scheme where the encrypted STUNNEL is acting between TWO UNECRYPTED channels ?
unencrypted client application ---- unencrypted channel ----> client stunnel accepting on PORT-1, connnecting to REMOTE STUNNEL on PORT-2,
---ENCRYPTED CHANNEL -------> REMOTE STUNNEL listening on PORT-2, connecting to a local UNENCRYPTED server on PORT-3 ---> unencrypted LOCAL application listening on port 3...
according to your conf files : port-1 seems to be 7999, port-2 ..8001, port-3 : 8000
To my mind the problem may come from the IP ADDRESSES you are using :
your client unencrypted application should connect to CLIENT STUNNEL IP (if on the same machine : 127.0.0.1). AND NOT ANY MORE to the IP of your original unencrypted server.
On the server side : connect to the IP of the NEW unencrypted application location, should be...I think...127.0.0.1.
Failing to adapt IP in APPLICATIONS it is NORMAL that the traffic does not pass through stunnel.
Something else: check firewall on both sides...but I really think you just have bad ip configured in your client/server original UNencrypted applications...
Regards Pierre
Le 17/11/2012 12:01, Uffe Vedenbrant a écrit :
A small tip..
Use netstat to see if stunnel actually listens to the port that you have set up. You can also see if you have a working TCP connection between the machines.. I.e. established a stunnel session.. You will then both see line with LISTEN flag as well as a line with a ESTABLISHED flag.
On windows you also can use the flag "-B" to see which process ( in most cases ) that is using a port.. This requires admin rights.. ( right click CMD and select run ad admin )
Example
CMD> netstat -B -an
You will see a list of UDP/TCP listening port as well as established sessions etc.. Look for the ports here..
C:>netstat -B -an
Active Connections
Proto Local Address Foreign Address State TCP 0.0.0.0:135 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING RpcSs [svchost.exe] TCP 0.0.0.0:445 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING Can not obtain ownership information TCP 0.0.0.0:5357 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING Can not obtain ownership information TCP 0.0.0.0:8080 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING Can not obtain ownership information TCP 0.0.0.0:8800 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING Can not obtain ownership information TCP 0.0.0.0:17500 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING [Dropbox.exe]On 2012-11-17 11:13, Hal Hovland wrote:
Hi Brian, thanks for taking a look. The client .conf uses 7999 and 8001.
On
the accept side I've tried 7999 and 192.168.1.158:7999 and 0.0.0.0:7999.
I should also say I tried all this with Ncat (same result) and that the machines have the latest .NET Framework installed, viz., 4.5 - could that
be
the problem?
Regards, Hal
From: Brian Wilkins [mailto:bwilkins@gmail.com] Sent: 16 November 2012 23:25 To: Hal Hovland Cc: stunnel-users@stunnel.org Subject: Re: [stunnel-users] Problem using stunnel on Windows 7
I didn't see a port setting in the clients stunnel.conf
On Nov 16, 2012 6:18 PM, "Hal Hovland" hhovland@btconnect.com wrote:
I've spent days googling this and read everything relevant in the
archives.
I'm developing a Windows 7 program that connects to a financial trading exchange that expects all communication to be SSL'd. Everything I read
said
that stunnel is the answer because of ease of installation and use. After
a
day of abortive attempts to link to the exchange, I decided to create a
much
simpler test environment involving two Windows 7 computers next to each other here.
One, let's call it Riven-II (192.168.1.9), is set up with a simple
Listener
program that listens on port 8000. From stunnel's viewpoint this will be
a
server. The second machine, Lightning (192.168.1.158), has a simple
Sender
program that sends a text message via port 7999 to Riven-II (192.168.1.9:8000) - this will be the Client. In the absence of stunnel,
all
messages sent from Lightning/Sender appears on the window of Listener. So far so good.
I've downloaded and installed the very latest version (4.54) of stunnel
on
both machines. On installation I entered the same responses to the certificate generating process.
On the Server machine, hard wired to a Broadband Router, I configured stunnel.conf as (removing comments for simplicity)
debug = 7
output = stunnel.log
socket = l:TCP_NODELAY=1
socket = r:TCP_NODELAY=1
cert = stunnel.pem
key = stunnel.pem
options = NO_SSLv2
taskbar=yes
[Listener]
connect=8000
accept=8001
On the Client machine, connected to the router via wi-fi, we have in stunnel.conf
debug = 7
output = stunnel.log
cert = stunnel.pem
socket = l:TCP_NODELAY=1
socket = r:TCP_NODELAY=1
fips=no
options = NO_SSLv2
delay=yes
taskbar=yes
client=yes
[sender]
accept = 0.0.0.0:7999 (I've tried just 7999 and
192.168.1.158:7999,
here. Makes no difference)
connect = 192.168.1.9:8001
I've tried many variations with the same result, but the above is where
they
have ended up.
My understanding of this is that stunnel both ends will be intercepting
port
8000 on the Server and port 7999 on the Client and presenting/receiving
SSL
encoded messages across the wire on port 8001.
Starting stunnel in the Server (not as a Windows service, although I did try that as well) the following log appears:
2012.11.16 22 tel:2012.11.16%2022 :34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: No limit detected for the number of clients
2012.11.16 22 tel:2012.11.16%2022 :34:08 LOG5[3484:6184]: stunnel 4.54
on
x86-pc-msvc-1500 platform
2012.11.16 22 tel:2012.11.16%2022 :34:08 LOG5[3484:6184]:
Compiled/running
with OpenSSL 1.0.1c-fips 10 May 2012
2012.11.16 22 tel:2012.11.16%2022 :34:08 LOG5[3484:6184]:
Threading:WIN32
SSL:+ENGINE+OCSP+FIPS Auth:none Sockets:SELECT+IPv6
2012.11.16 22 tel:2012.11.16%2022 :34:08 LOG5[3484:6184]: Reading configuration from file stunnel.conf
2012.11.16 22 tel:2012.11.16%2022 :34:08 LOG5[3484:6184]: FIPS mode is enabled
2012.11.16 22 tel:2012.11.16%2022 :34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: Compression
not
enabled
2012.11.16 22 tel:2012.11.16%2022 :34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: Snagged 64 random bytes from C:/.rnd
2012.11.16 22 tel:2012.11.16%2022 :34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: Wrote 1024
new
random bytes to C:/.rnd
2012.11.16 22 tel:2012.11.16%2022 :34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: PRNG seeded successfully
2012.11.16 22 tel:2012.11.16%2022 :34:08 LOG6[3484:6184]: Initializing service [Listener]
2012.11.16 22:34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: Certificate: stunnel.pem
2012.11.16 22:34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: Certificate loaded
2012.11.16 22:34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: Key file: stunnel.pem
2012.11.16 22:34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: Private key loaded
2012.11.16 22:34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: Could not load DH parameters from stunnel.pem
2012.11.16 22:34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: Using hardcoded DH parameters
2012.11.16 22:34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: DH initialized with 2048-bit key
2012.11.16 22:34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: ECDH initialized with curve
prime256v1
2012.11.16 22:34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: SSL options set: 0x01000004
2012.11.16 22:34:08 LOG5[3484:6184]: Configuration successful
2012.11.16 22:34:08 LOG7[3484:6184]: Service [Listener] (FD=272) bound to 0.0.0.0:8001
On the Client, the log shows:
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG7[4184:4948]: No limit detected for the number of clients
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG5[4184:4948]: stunnel 4.54 on x86-pc-msvc-1500 platform
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG5[4184:4948]: Compiled/running with OpenSSL 1.0.1c-fips 10 May 2012
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG5[4184:4948]: Threading:WIN32
SSL:+ENGINE+OCSP+FIPS
Auth:none Sockets:SELECT+IPv6
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG5[4184:4948]: Reading configuration from file stunnel.conf
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG5[4184:4948]: FIPS mode is disabled
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG7[4184:4948]: Compression not enabled
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG7[4184:4948]: Snagged 64 random bytes from C:/.rnd
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG7[4184:4948]: Wrote 1024 new random bytes to
C:/.rnd
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG7[4184:4948]: PRNG seeded successfully
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG6[4184:4948]: Initializing service [sender]
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG7[4184:4948]: Certificate: stunnel.pem
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG7[4184:4948]: Certificate loaded
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG7[4184:4948]: Key file: stunnel.pem
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG7[4184:4948]: Private key loaded
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG7[4184:4948]: SSL options set: 0x01000004
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG5[4184:4948]: Configuration successful
2012.11.16 22:25:53 LOG7[4184:4948]: Service [sender] (FD=224) bound to 0.0.0.0:7999
Running the Listener on the Server and Sender on the Client adds nothing
to
the log, and port sniffers on both machines show traffic between 7999 and 8000 (exactly the same as when stunnel is not running). No sign of the
use
of port 8001.
I'd appreciate any input on this. I'm sure I must be doing something
stupid,
but I've watched hours of YouTube videos, read many hundreds of web
pages,
and been through the documentation quite a few times, to no avail.
I have a Java based version, running in a JVM in the same Windows
machines,
that talks perfectly to the exchange using some inbuilt SSL capabilities
of
an included library, so that should probably eliminate any
hardware/router
issues?
Regards, Hal
stunnel-users mailing list stunnel-users@stunnel.org https://www.stunnel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users
_____No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2629/5400 - Release Date: 11/16/12
stunnel-users mailing list stunnel-users@stunnel.org https://www.stunnel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users
stunnel-users mailing list stunnel-users@stunnel.org https://www.stunnel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2629/5400 - Release Date: 11/16/12
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2629/5400 - Release Date: 11/16/12