SSL support about websocketd HOT 38 CLOSED

I second this.

I've just discovered websocketd, and I really like this idea. This issue, however, is a deal breaker for the app I was planning to use it on. I hope this will be implemented soon.

from websocketd.

WebEnchanter, if you need SSL support right now you can use an SSL enabled reverse proxy in front of websocketd, such as stunnel, HAProxy or Nginx.

from websocketd.

Thanks Joe. Never thought of that. Awesome!

from websocketd.

It's working really well with nginx.

from websocketd.

@biafra what's your set up like? For some reason I can't seem to make it work on nginx.

nginx version: nginx/1.4.3

Here is my location block:

  location /comet {
        proxy_pass              http://localhost:8080/;
        proxy_http_version      1.1;
        proxy_set_header        Upgrade $http_upgrade;
        proxy_set_header        Connection "upgrade";
        proxy_set_header        Host $host;
    }

Then in count.html I'm using:

var ws = new WebSocket('wss://localhost/comet/'); 

Am I missing something?

from websocketd.

Also are you using it in production? Is websocketd production ready?

from websocketd.

Same as you. I've just added "proxy_buffering off;" to that location.

You already have a certificate and configured the ssl entries right ?
Something along this lines:

    ssl on;
    ssl_certificate /etc/nginx/ssl/server.crt;
    ssl_certificate_key /etc/nginx/ssl/server.key;

    ssl_session_timeout 5m;
    ssl_protocols       SSLv3 TLSv1 TLSv1.1 TLSv1.2;
    ssl_ciphers

AES128-SHA:AES256-SHA:RC4-SHA:DES-CBC3-SHA:RC4-MD5;
ssl_prefer_server_ciphers on;

Ah, with safari IOS secure websockets won't work if are not using a valid
certificate. If you are using one generated by you it won't work.

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 3:09 PM, WebEnchanter [email protected]:

@biafra https://github.com/biafra what's your set up like? For some
reason I can't seem to make it work on nginx.

nginx version: nginx/1.4.3

Here is my location block:

location /comet {
proxy_pass http://localhost:8080/;
proxy_http_version 1.1;
proxy_set_header Upgrade $http_upgrade;
proxy_set_header Connection "upgrade";
proxy_set_header Host $host;
}

Then in count.html I'm using:

var ws = new WebSocket('wss://localhost/comet/');

Am I missing something?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/17#issuecomment-33131521
.

from websocketd.

OK. I'm using a self signed certificate on localhost for testing. I guess that's where the problem is. Tried adding proxy_buffering off; to that block too and still can't get it to work.

I tried with Opera and Chrome on Arch Linux.

from websocketd.

Check here for compatible browsers that support wss http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebSocket#Browser_implementation

from websocketd.

Thanks. According to that link, both of the browsers I'm using should support wss. Will try with a commercial certificate.

from websocketd.

It seems like the issue is the proxy itself. I have tried with a valid certificate and it doesn't work either. I also get the same result on a non-secure connection using ws://. In both cases all I'm getting is 'DISCONNECT'.

Without using nginx as a proxy, however, it's working fine.

from websocketd.

I thought you have already tested without SSL. Rereading you comment I think you don't have the usual reverse proxy configuration. I've got this:

    location /websocket {
            proxy_pass      http://127.0.0.1:8080;
            include         /etc/nginx/proxy.conf;
            proxy_http_version 1.1;
            proxy_set_header Upgrade $http_upgrade;
            proxy_set_header Connection "upgrade";
            #proxy_read_timeout 86400;
            proxy_buffering off;
    }

Where proxy.conf has at least these lines (you can add them directly on your location scope):

    proxy_redirect          off;
    proxy_set_header        Host            $host;
    proxy_set_header        X-Real-IP       $remote_addr;
    proxy_set_header        X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for;

from websocketd.

Hey @biafra - this is really useful. It would be great if you could write this up as short tutorial for the websocketd wiki.

Thanks
-Joe

from websocketd.

@biafra When I initially tried it I didn't test proxing without SSL.

I have updated my location block to include the lines that were missing:

    proxy_redirect        off;
    proxy_set_header        X-Real-IP       $remote_addr;
    proxy_set_header        X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for;

and I've upgraded my nginx to 1.4.4 but I still get the same result.

It seems there is something wrong with my environment.

I have tested my setup with http://websocketstest.com. Under "Environment" there is:

HTTP Proxy                        No 

I will try to Google a solution to this and let you know my results.

from websocketd.

You can see the result of my test at http://websocketstest.com/result/288844

from websocketd.

@WebEnchanter That "HTTP Proxy No" is just saying your browser is not using a proxy. I've just tested my gateway with "Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 6.1) Presto/2.12.388 Version/12.12" and it works.

@joewalnes I'll try to write down something but can promise when.

from websocketd.

Is there reason why you all don't like opening TLS sockets in golang program?

Reverse proxy way is insecure by definition (UNIX domain sockets are secure to the point that would be sufficient here since golang memory handling is very hard to work with fully securely but websocketd does not support them) and IMO there is benefit to secure things properly, even when there is performance cost.

My proposal would be to add --tls to the options list to create ssl-only service but that leads to need of running two separate go daemons if you need both secure and insecure service.

from websocketd.

Ok, not as easy as I said ...
maybe websocketd may use some sort of new flags to set listening IP/port/cert/key combination... Probably worth looking at other tools config options and copycat them.

from websocketd.

Alex, this open issue is to do precisely what you say - to add native SSL support to websocketd. The rest of the discussion is about workarounds until this issue is implemented.

The cmd line options I'd like to add are:

--ssl (enable ssl)
--sslcert=... (public cert file)
--sslkey=... (private key file)
--sslca=... (optional, if using a custom CA)

from websocketd.

So your choice is for "you either using SSL or no", right?
I will add this sometime this week... Need to check how golang behaves with password protected keys.

CA is not something that people use separately at server side anymore. It caused confusion betweeen two things - CA that server checks on certs that users send and CA that points to authority that signed server's certificate. To avoid confusion the second one is put along with server's cert in single pem file, many cert authorities even send it to you this way. Self-generated ones have to be concatenated (see comment here http://golang.org/pkg/net/http/#ListenAndServeTLS)

As I see things so far, there is no "access control" in websocketd where checking client's SSL cert with CA could be necessary so I'll not think of it :)

from websocketd.

So your choice is for "you either using SSL or no", right?

That's a good question. I was thinking of it as a single option, but now websocketd also supports binding to multiple host/ports it may make more sense to do it on a per instance basis. On the other hand, that scenario seems pretty rare. I'm tempted to go for simplicity.

Interesting about the CA. For internal apps, I've always been explicitly defining a CA file used for both client and server certs, but I see that it's not necessary. Ok forget about that option.

Regarding access control, it would be:

• does the SSL handshake work (i.e. find a common CA in the chain the both server and client agree on)
• underlying user script can perform additional checking if it needed to something based on client cert

In order for the underlying user scripts to know about the SSL session, this information should be passed as environment variables in a similar manner to a traditional CGI server. See http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/mod_ssl.html

from websocketd.

Quickly gets complicated :) I'll do few passes in a branch and we'll talk :)

from websocketd.

Well... Strike first commit.. Here is change for review before I'll send pull request:
https://github.com/asergeyev/websocketd/compare/ssl

I'd like to know your initial opinion and thoughts on where it should move.

SSL_* variables would be one thing.
thinking about CA support for user auth is quite another journey.
you might have another ideas.

from websocketd.

Looks great so far.

Looks good to be checked in. The custom CA support and SSL* variables can be follow up features.

One really teeny tiny nitpick: in config.go, use "websocketd" instead of "WebsocketD".

from websocketd.

There is significant digging required for supporting encrypted private key PEMs. I decided to give up on it for now. I agree with putting this point as somewhat like "SSL support preview". You also can put some thinking into future SSL-related enhancements.

from websocketd.

Another additional pursuit is that ciphers should be configurable to avoid high cost of handshakes...

Right now I see my system use ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA which could be easiely downgraded to something else. Looks like many frontends now stich with ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 and IMO backends could go lower depending on problems TLS is trying to solve.

from websocketd.

I wanted to get rid of having another global config element, SSL and replace it to use req.TLS. Please see #48 I created and closed later since we never discussed it. Not sure if it makes things better but it's consistent with cgi module.

from websocketd.

Is SSL WebSocket working for someone with websocketd ?
wss://domain.tld returns WebSocket error #1006 "Abnormal closure".

from websocketd.

What version do you use? Also what kind of flags in command line to start websocketd.

from websocketd.

I use version 0.2.9.
websocketd is started with the following command :

./websocketd
    --port=19443
    --ssl
    --sslcert="/pathToCrt/server.crt"
    --sslkey="/pathToKey/server.key"
    ./server.php

from websocketd.

You then need wss://domain.tld:19443/

Also note that if you trying it in browser with self-signed cert it might not work until you accepted this cert by using https://domain.tld:19443/ and saved security exception (you might also use --devconsole option to play with wss:// address and --loglevel debug to see bunch of stuff about internal things)

Let me know if you did all that before and it still does not work...

from websocketd.

Yes, I use ws://domain.tld:19443 to connect to websocketd.
Accepting the certificate using https did the trick, reverse-proxying websocketd through nginx also works.
Thanks a lot for your help :-)

from websocketd.

Awesome. I glad someone uses ssl and can let me know if it misbehaves :)

from websocketd.

SSL works flawlessly.
Why websocketd does not run as a daemon ?
I am trying to daemonize websocketd on a Synology NAS (and I should open another issue).

from websocketd.

What linux-family does it run? Is there upstart?

I'd recommend to use ustart or runit or other process monitor instead of daemonizing... There are certain problems and solutions but I'd like to see if it's really a pain (I don't know if godaemon would be cross-platform and cannot really think of using it without that https://vividcortex.com/blog/2013/08/27/godaemon-a-library-to-daemonize-go-apps/ )

from websocketd.

Synology uses a custom version of Linux based on Busybox.
There is no tool to daemonize a process, but I think websocketd should start as a daemon instead of line interactive.
All this has nothing to do with SSL, maybe we should open a new issue ?

from websocketd.

yeah. Let's try to explore what we can do there.

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Piwi [email protected] wrote:

Synology uses a custom version of Linux based on Busybox.
There is no tool to daemonize a process, but I think websocketd should
start as a daemon instead of line interactive.
All this has nothing to do with SSL, maybe we should open a new issue ?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#17 (comment).

from websocketd.

I want to close this one. When we will explore SSL features they better to be in new issues.

from websocketd.