[stunnel-users] Problem using stunnel on Windows 7

[Pierre DELAAGE]

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 at gmail.com]
>> Sent: 16 November 2012 23:25
>> To: Hal Hovland
>> Cc: stunnel-users at 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 at 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 at 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 at stunnel.org
>> https://www.stunnel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users
>>
> _______________________________________________
> stunnel-users mailing list
> stunnel-users at stunnel.org
> https://www.stunnel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users