- stunnel-users - stunnel.org

4.26 works OK, 4.27 will not POP email
by Jeff Salisbury 14 Jun '09

14 Jun '09

Greetings, We have been using Stunnel 4.26 to facilitate the sending and receiving of email with an email client that is not SSL enabled. Version 4.26 has been working great. However, when we upgrade to 4.27, we are unable to POP email (we can send email). We did not change our Stunnel.conf file. Can anyone advise us what we need to do to get 4.27 working? I've included our Stunnel.conf file contents, and the Stunnel log output below. Regards, Jeff ===================================================== # GLOBAL OPTIONS client = yes #output = C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\stunnel-log.txt debug = 7 taskbar = yes # SERVICE-LEVEL OPTIONS [pop3] accept=995 connect=mail.OurPOP.com:995 [smtp] accept=465 connect=mail.OurSMTP.com:465 ===================================================== 2009.06.14 14:03:03 LOG7[3348:540]: RAND_status claims sufficient entropy for the PRNG 2009.06.14 14:03:03 LOG7[3348:540]: PRNG seeded successfully 2009.06.14 14:03:03 LOG7[3348:540]: SSL context initialized for service pop3 2009.06.14 14:03:03 LOG7[3348:540]: SSL context initialized for service smtp 2009.06.14 14:03:03 LOG5[3348:540]: stunnel 4.27 on x86-pc-mingw32-gnu with OpenSSL 0.9.8k 25 Mar 2009 2009.06.14 14:03:03 LOG5[3348:540]: Threading:WIN32 SSL:ENGINE Sockets:SELECT,IPv6 2009.06.14 14:03:03 LOG5[3348:3668]: No limit detected for the number of clients 2009.06.14 14:03:03 LOG7[3348:3668]: FD 204 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.14 14:03:03 LOG7[3348:3668]: SO_REUSEADDR option set on accept socket 2009.06.14 14:03:03 LOG7[3348:3668]: pop3 bound to 0.0.0.0:995 2009.06.14 14:03:03 LOG7[3348:3668]: FD 212 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.14 14:03:03 LOG7[3348:3668]: SO_REUSEADDR option set on accept socket 2009.06.14 14:03:03 LOG7[3348:3668]: smtp bound to 0.0.0.0:465 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:3668]: pop3 accepted FD=228 from 127.0.0.1:2027 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:3668]: Creating a new thread 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:3668]: New thread created 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:3668]: pop3 accepted FD=244 from 127.0.0.1:2026 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:3668]: Creating a new thread 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:3668]: New thread created 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:1144]: pop3 started 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:1144]: FD 228 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG5[3348:1144]: pop3 accepted connection from 127.0.0.1:2027 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:1144]: FD 268 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG6[3348:1144]: connect_blocking: connecting 216.97.239.60:995 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:4060]: pop3 started 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:4060]: FD 244 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG5[3348:4060]: pop3 accepted connection from 127.0.0.1:2026 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:4060]: FD 280 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG6[3348:4060]: connect_blocking: connecting 216.97.239.60:995 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:1144]: connect_blocking: s_poll_wait 216.97.239.60:995: waiting 10 seconds 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:4060]: connect_blocking: s_poll_wait 216.97.239.60:995: waiting 10 seconds 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG5[3348:1144]: connect_blocking: connected 216.97.239.60:995 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG5[3348:1144]: pop3 connected remote server from 192.168.0.55:2028 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:1144]: Remote FD=268 initialized 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:1144]: SSL state (connect): before/connect initialization 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:1144]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 write client hello A 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG5[3348:4060]: connect_blocking: connected 216.97.239.60:995 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG5[3348:4060]: pop3 connected remote server from 192.168.0.55:2029 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:4060]: Remote FD=280 initialized 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:4060]: SSL state (connect): before/connect initialization 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:4060]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 write client hello A 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:1144]: SSL alert (read): fatal: handshake failure 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG3[3348:1144]: SSL_connect: 14094410: error:14094410:SSL routines:SSL3_READ_BYTES:sslv3 alert handshake failure 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG5[3348:1144]: Connection reset: 0 bytes sent to SSL, 0 bytes sent to socket 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:1144]: pop3 finished (1 left) 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:4060]: SSL alert (read): fatal: handshake failure 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG3[3348:4060]: SSL_connect: 14094410: error:14094410:SSL routines:SSL3_READ_BYTES:sslv3 alert handshake failure 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG5[3348:4060]: Connection reset: 0 bytes sent to SSL, 0 bytes sent to socket 2009.06.14 14:03:11 LOG7[3348:4060]: pop3 finished (0 left)

1 0

Silence after "Acquired libwrap process"
by James Brown 12 Jun '09

12 Jun '09

I'm trying to use stunnel to send email with SSL authentication. Sending the email with Apple's Mail.app with 'use default ports' selected. stunnel.log output: 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: Snagged 64 random bytes from /Users/jlbrown/.rnd 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: Wrote 1024 new random bytes to /Users/jlbrown/.rnd 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: RAND_status claims sufficient entropy for the PRNG 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: PRNG seeded successfully 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: Certificate: /etc/ postfix/smtpd.cert 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: Certificate loaded 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: Key file: /etc/ postfix/smtpd.key 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: Private key loaded 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: SSL context initialized for service ssmtp 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: Certificate: /etc/ postfix/smtpd.cert 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: Certificate loaded 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: Key file: /etc/ postfix/smtpd.key 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: Private key loaded 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: SSL context initialized for service ssmtp2 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG5[41897:140735078037248]: stunnel 4.27 on i686- apple-darwin9.7.0 with OpenSSL 0.9.7l 28 Sep 2006 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG5[41897:140735078037248]: Threading:PTHREAD SSL:ENGINE Sockets:SELECT,IPv6 Auth:LIBWRAP 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG6[41897:140735078037248]: file ulimit = 256 (can be changed with 'ulimit -n') 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG6[41897:140735078037248]: FD_SETSIZE = 1024 (some systems allow to increase this value) 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG5[41897:140735078037248]: 125 clients allowed 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: FD 10 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: FD 11 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: FD 12 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: SO_REUSEADDR option set on accept socket 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: ssmtp bound to 0.0.0.0:465 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: FD 13 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: SO_REUSEADDR option set on accept socket 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41897:140735078037248]: ssmtp2 bound to 0.0.0.0:587 2009.06.12 09:58:17 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: Created pid file /usr/ local/var/run/stunnel/stunnel.pid 2009.06.12 09:58:56 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp2 accepted FD=14 from 192.168.1.10:64996 2009.06.12 09:58:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: ssmtp2 started 2009.06.12 09:58:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: FD 14 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 09:58:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 09:58:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 09:58:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: Acquired libwrap process #0 2009.06.12 10:00:04 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp2 accepted FD=15 from 192.168.1.10:65006 2009.06.12 10:00:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: ssmtp2 started 2009.06.12 10:00:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: FD 15 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:00:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:00:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:00:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: Acquired libwrap process #1 2009.06.12 10:01:04 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp accepted FD=16 from 192.168.1.10:65013 2009.06.12 10:01:04 LOG7[41903:4295790592]: ssmtp started 2009.06.12 10:01:04 LOG7[41903:4295790592]: FD 16 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:01:04 LOG7[41903:4295790592]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:01:04 LOG7[41903:4295790592]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:01:04 LOG7[41903:4295790592]: Acquired libwrap process #2 2009.06.12 10:03:56 LOG6[41903:4295561216]: read_blocking: s_poll_wait timeout 2009.06.12 10:03:56 LOG5[41903:4295561216]: Connection reset: 0 bytes sent to SSL, 0 bytes sent to socket 2009.06.12 10:03:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: ssmtp2 finished (2 left) 2009.06.12 10:03:56 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp accepted FD=14 from 192.168.1.10:65022 2009.06.12 10:03:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: ssmtp started 2009.06.12 10:03:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: FD 14 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:03:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:03:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:03:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: Acquired libwrap process #3 2009.06.12 10:05:04 LOG6[41903:4295675904]: read_blocking: s_poll_wait timeout 2009.06.12 10:05:04 LOG5[41903:4295675904]: Connection reset: 0 bytes sent to SSL, 0 bytes sent to socket 2009.06.12 10:05:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: ssmtp2 finished (2 left) 2009.06.12 10:05:04 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp accepted FD=15 from 192.168.1.10:65028 2009.06.12 10:05:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: ssmtp started 2009.06.12 10:05:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: FD 15 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:05:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:05:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:05:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: Acquired libwrap process #4 2009.06.12 10:06:04 LOG6[41903:4295790592]: read_blocking: s_poll_wait timeout 2009.06.12 10:06:04 LOG5[41903:4295790592]: Connection reset: 0 bytes sent to SSL, 0 bytes sent to socket 2009.06.12 10:06:04 LOG7[41903:4295790592]: ssmtp finished (2 left) 2009.06.12 10:06:04 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp accepted FD=16 from 192.168.1.10:65032 2009.06.12 10:06:04 LOG7[41903:4295790592]: ssmtp started 2009.06.12 10:06:04 LOG7[41903:4295790592]: FD 16 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:06:04 LOG7[41903:4295790592]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:06:04 LOG7[41903:4295790592]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:08:56 LOG6[41903:4295561216]: read_blocking: s_poll_wait timeout 2009.06.12 10:08:56 LOG5[41903:4295561216]: Connection reset: 0 bytes sent to SSL, 0 bytes sent to socket 2009.06.12 10:08:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: ssmtp finished (2 left) 2009.06.12 10:08:56 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp2 accepted FD=14 from 192.168.1.10:65040 2009.06.12 10:08:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: ssmtp2 started 2009.06.12 10:08:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: FD 14 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:08:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:08:56 LOG7[41903:4295561216]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:10:04 LOG6[41903:4295675904]: read_blocking: s_poll_wait timeout 2009.06.12 10:10:04 LOG5[41903:4295675904]: Connection reset: 0 bytes sent to SSL, 0 bytes sent to socket 2009.06.12 10:10:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: ssmtp finished (2 left) 2009.06.12 10:10:04 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp accepted FD=15 from 192.168.1.10:65044 2009.06.12 10:10:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: ssmtp started 2009.06.12 10:10:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: FD 15 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:10:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:10:04 LOG7[41903:4295675904]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:11:04 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp accepted FD=17 from 192.168.1.10:65048 2009.06.12 10:11:04 LOG7[41903:4295905280]: ssmtp started 2009.06.12 10:11:04 LOG7[41903:4295905280]: FD 17 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:11:04 LOG7[41903:4295905280]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:11:04 LOG7[41903:4295905280]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:13:56 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp accepted FD=18 from 192.168.1.10:65060 2009.06.12 10:13:56 LOG7[41903:4297134080]: ssmtp started 2009.06.12 10:13:56 LOG7[41903:4297134080]: FD 18 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:13:56 LOG7[41903:4297134080]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:13:56 LOG7[41903:4297134080]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:15:04 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp accepted FD=19 from 192.168.1.10:65063 2009.06.12 10:15:04 LOG7[41903:4297211904]: ssmtp started 2009.06.12 10:15:04 LOG7[41903:4297211904]: FD 19 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:15:04 LOG7[41903:4297211904]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:15:04 LOG7[41903:4297211904]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:18:56 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp2 accepted FD=20 from 192.168.1.10:65090 2009.06.12 10:18:56 LOG7[41903:4297326592]: ssmtp2 started 2009.06.12 10:18:56 LOG7[41903:4297326592]: FD 20 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:18:56 LOG7[41903:4297326592]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:18:56 LOG7[41903:4297326592]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:20:04 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp2 accepted FD=21 from 192.168.1.10:65093 2009.06.12 10:20:04 LOG7[41903:4297441280]: ssmtp2 started 2009.06.12 10:20:04 LOG7[41903:4297441280]: FD 21 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:20:04 LOG7[41903:4297441280]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:20:04 LOG7[41903:4297441280]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:23:56 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp2 accepted FD=22 from 192.168.1.10:65111 2009.06.12 10:23:56 LOG7[41903:4297555968]: ssmtp2 started 2009.06.12 10:23:56 LOG7[41903:4297555968]: FD 22 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:23:56 LOG7[41903:4297555968]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:23:56 LOG7[41903:4297555968]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:25:04 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp accepted FD=23 from 192.168.1.10:65113 2009.06.12 10:25:04 LOG7[41903:4297670656]: ssmtp started 2009.06.12 10:25:04 LOG7[41903:4297670656]: FD 23 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:25:04 LOG7[41903:4297670656]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:25:04 LOG7[41903:4297670656]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:28:56 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp2 accepted FD=24 from 192.168.1.10:65125 2009.06.12 10:28:56 LOG7[41903:4297785344]: ssmtp2 started 2009.06.12 10:28:56 LOG7[41903:4297785344]: FD 24 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:28:56 LOG7[41903:4297785344]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:28:56 LOG7[41903:4297785344]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:30:04 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp2 accepted FD=25 from 192.168.1.10:65128 2009.06.12 10:30:04 LOG7[41903:4297900032]: ssmtp2 started 2009.06.12 10:30:04 LOG7[41903:4297900032]: FD 25 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:30:04 LOG7[41903:4297900032]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:30:04 LOG7[41903:4297900032]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:33:56 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp2 accepted FD=26 from 192.168.1.10:65299 2009.06.12 10:33:56 LOG7[41903:4298014720]: ssmtp2 started 2009.06.12 10:33:56 LOG7[41903:4298014720]: FD 26 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:33:56 LOG7[41903:4298014720]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:33:56 LOG7[41903:4298014720]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:35:04 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp2 accepted FD=27 from 192.168.1.10:65326 2009.06.12 10:35:04 LOG7[41903:4298129408]: ssmtp2 started 2009.06.12 10:35:04 LOG7[41903:4298129408]: FD 27 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:35:04 LOG7[41903:4298129408]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:35:04 LOG7[41903:4298129408]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:40:04 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp accepted FD=28 from 192.168.1.10:65365 2009.06.12 10:40:04 LOG7[41903:4298244096]: ssmtp started 2009.06.12 10:40:04 LOG7[41903:4298244096]: FD 28 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:40:04 LOG7[41903:4298244096]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:40:04 LOG7[41903:4298244096]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:45:04 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp accepted FD=29 from 192.168.1.10:65377 2009.06.12 10:45:04 LOG7[41903:4298358784]: ssmtp started 2009.06.12 10:45:04 LOG7[41903:4298358784]: FD 29 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:45:04 LOG7[41903:4298358784]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:45:04 LOG7[41903:4298358784]: Waiting for a libwrap process 2009.06.12 10:50:04 LOG7[41903:140735078037248]: ssmtp accepted FD=30 from 192.168.1.10:65406 2009.06.12 10:50:04 LOG7[41903:4298473472]: ssmtp started 2009.06.12 10:50:04 LOG7[41903:4298473472]: FD 30 in non-blocking mode 2009.06.12 10:50:04 LOG7[41903:4298473472]: TCP_NODELAY option set on local socket 2009.06.12 10:50:04 LOG7[41903:4298473472]: Waiting for a libwrap process Stunnel is running on Mac OS X 10.5.7. Any help would be much appreciated. James.

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] 1 server and more desktops
by aaa aaa 08 Jun '09

08 Jun '09

Hello Carter, thank you very much for your help and nice examples. I will try it in my local network. Have a good day. Mia ---- Pôvodná správa ---- Od koho: Carter Browne <cbrowne(a)cbcs-usa.com> Komu: aaa aaa <miamia(a)inMail.sk> Dátum: 8. 6. 2009 17:52:00 Predmet: Re: [stunnel-users] 1 server and more desktops Mia, I work in both Windows and Linux, so I use a Windows approach - copying files where in Linux a link would be more appropriate. Assume server.pem is the server full server certificate including the private key and client1.pem is a full client certificate including the key. The first step is to make a copy of the server certificate and delete the lines starting with -----BEGIN RSA PRIVATE KEY------ down through the blank line after -----END RSA PRIVATE KEY----- Initial I call this server-pub.pem The command: openssl x509 -in server-pub.pem -subject_hash -noout will print out the hash for the server key (as 8 hexadecimal digits), for example abcef012 Then I rename server-pub.pem to abcdef012.0 I repeat the same process for each client key, so that client1.pem in this example would have a public key named 987654fe.0 (assuming that the hash of 987654fe). In the client1 configuration: cert = client1.pem key = client1.pem verify = 3 cafile = abcdef012.0 In the server configuration cert = server1.pem key = server1.pem verify = 3 capath = capath In the capath directory is 987654fe.0 ... Plus the hashes of the other clients. In Windows, the capath is under the stunnel directory. The client certificates can also be concatenated in a single file. If you use a directory, it is not necessary to restart stunnel if you add a new client. If you use a concatenated file, you do have to restart stunnel if you add a client. There are some notes in the documentation about the structure of a concatenated file. I hope this helps. Carter Carter Browne CBCS cbrowne(a)cbcs-usa.com 781-721-2890 aaa aaa wrote: > Hi Carter, > > thank you. I am trying to use scenario with self-signed certificates > exactly like you are using it. Could you please write me some examples > of config for server and clients? I don't know where to put private > keys and how to set up server for acceptation of certificates from > clients only - server must reject all communication without/or with > other certificates as are stored in his folder. > > thank you in advance > > regards, > mia > > ---- Pôvodná správa ---- > Od koho: Carter Browne <cbrowne(a)cbcs-usa.com> > Komu: aaa aaa <miamia(a)inMail.sk> > Dátum: 8. 6. 2009 15:00:00 > Predmet: Re: [stunnel-users] 1 server and more desktops > > I do this using self-signed certificates and verify=2 or verify=3. The > remote computers would only have the servers public certificate their > CAfile (or CApath). The server must have all the remote computers > public certificates in its CAfile or CApath. See the rules about how to > build those. If you are only using self-signed certificates, you can > use verify=3, otherwise you will have to use verify=2. Each port that > you want to forward must be in you stunnel.conf file - without knowing > what you are trying to do, it is hard to be more specific. > > Carter > > Carter Browne > CBCS > cbrowne(a)cbcs-usa.com > 781-721-2890 > > > > aaa aaa wrote: > > hello Christophe, > > > > thanks for your answer. Sorry for any misunderstanding. Well, I just > > wanted to ask if it is able to set stunnel for working with more > > certificates? So it means that I don't want to have secured tunnel > > between remote and local computer only but also between one remote and > > many local computers with more certificates? Every local computer > > should have own certificate. > > > > Is this possible? > > > > thank you. > > > > ---- Pôvodná správa ---- > > Od koho: Christophe Nanteuil <christophe.nanteuil(a)gmail.com> > > Komu: aaa aaa <miamia(a)inmail.sk> > > Dátum: 7. 6. 2009 16:27:00 > > Predmet: Re: [stunnel-users] 1 server and more desktops > > > > Hello, > > > > Stunnel is an application oriented tunnel, not a machine oriented > > tunnel. Please, be more precise in your requests if you want someone > > to be able to help you. It seems also that the stunnel documentation > > pages are worh reading in your case. > > > > Regards, > > > > -- > > Christophe > > > > > > 2009/6/7 aaa aaa <miamia(a)inmail.sk>: > > > Hello, > > > > > > I have one server and 3 desktops (PC1,PC2,PC3). I need to do this: > > every pc > > > should communicate with server with his own certificate and server > > should > > > sends anwser back to the computer encrypted for this one pc only. > > > > > > Example: PC3 {with server's public key} sends data to server and > server > > > sends answer to PC3 (encrypted wiht unique PC3's public key). > > > then PC2 {with server's public key} sends data to server and server > > sends > > > answer to PC2 (encrypted wiht unique PC2's public key). and so > on... how > > > should I configure stunnel for this? > > > > > > And another question > how should I configure all computers (server, > > > pc1,pc2,pc3) to accept communication over secured stunnel only and > > drop all > > > other unsecured communication? > > > > > > > > > thank you in advance. > > > regards, Mia > > > ---------- > > > Sutaz s InPage o ceny za viac ako 2000 Euro. Info na www.inpage.sk. > > Domena, > > > webhosting, e-mail a seo od 10 centov/denne. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > stunnel-users mailing list > > > stunnel-users(a)mirt.net > > > http://stunnel.mirt.net/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users > > > > > > > > ---------- > > Sutaz s InPage o ceny za viac ako 2000 Euro. Info na www.inpage.sk > > <http://www.inpage.sk/>. Domena, webhosting, e-mail a seo od 10 > > centov/denne. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > stunnel-users mailing list > > stunnel-users(a)mirt.net > > http://stunnel.mirt.net/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users > > > ---------- > Sutaz s InPage o ceny za viac ako 2000 Euro. Info na www.inpage.sk > <http://www.inpage.sk/>. Domena, webhosting, e-mail a seo od 10 > centov/denne. ---------- Sutaz s InPage o ceny za viac ako 2000 Euro. Info na www.inpage.sk. Domena, webhosting, e-mail a seo od 10 centov/denne.

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] 1 server and more desktops
by aaa aaa 08 Jun '09

08 Jun '09

Hi Carter, thank you. I am trying to use scenario with self-signed certificates exactly like you are using it. Could you please write me some examples of config for server and clients? I don't know where to put private keys and how to set up server for acceptation of certificates from clients only - server must reject all communication without/or with other certificates as are stored in his folder. thank you in advance regards, mia > ---- Pôvodná správa ---- > Od koho: Carter Browne <cbrowne(a)cbcs-usa.com> > Komu: aaa aaa <miamia(a)inMail.sk> > Dátum: 8. 6. 2009 15:00:00 > Predmet: Re: [stunnel-users] 1 server and more desktops > > I do this using self-signed certificates and verify=2 or verify=3. The > remote computers would only have the servers public certificate their > CAfile (or CApath). The server must have all the remote computers > public certificates in its CAfile or CApath. See the rules about how to > build those. If you are only using self-signed certificates, you can > use verify=3, otherwise you will have to use verify=2. Each port that > you want to forward must be in you stunnel.conf file - without knowing > what you are trying to do, it is hard to be more specific. > > Carter > > Carter Browne > CBCS > cbrowne(a)cbcs-usa.com > 781-721-2890 > > > > aaa aaa wrote: > > hello Christophe, > > > > thanks for your answer. Sorry for any misunderstanding. Well, I just > > wanted to ask if it is able to set stunnel for working with more > > certificates? So it means that I don't want to have secured tunnel > > between remote and local computer only but also between one remote and > > many local computers with more certificates? Every local computer > > should have own certificate. > > > > Is this possible? > > > > thank you. > > > > ---- Pôvodná správa ---- > > Od koho: Christophe Nanteuil <christophe.nanteuil(a)gmail.com> > > Komu: aaa aaa <miamia(a)inmail.sk> > > Dátum: 7. 6. 2009 16:27:00 > > Predmet: Re: [stunnel-users] 1 server and more desktops > > > > Hello, > > > > Stunnel is an application oriented tunnel, not a machine oriented > > tunnel. Please, be more precise in your requests if you want someone > > to be able to help you. It seems also that the stunnel documentation > > pages are worh reading in your case. > > > > Regards, > > > > -- > > Christophe > > > > > > 2009/6/7 aaa aaa <miamia(a)inmail.sk>: > > > Hello, > > > > > > I have one server and 3 desktops (PC1,PC2,PC3). I need to do this: > > every pc > > > should communicate with server with his own certificate and server > > should > > > sends anwser back to the computer encrypted for this one pc only. > > > > > > Example: PC3 {with server's public key} sends data to server and > server > > > sends answer to PC3 (encrypted wiht unique PC3's public key). > > > then PC2 {with server's public key} sends data to server and server > > sends > > > answer to PC2 (encrypted wiht unique PC2's public key). and so > on... how > > > should I configure stunnel for this? > > > > > > And another question > how should I configure all computers (server, > > > pc1,pc2,pc3) to accept communication over secured stunnel only and > > drop all > > > other unsecured communication? > > > > > > > > > thank you in advance. > > > regards, Mia > > > ---------- > > > Sutaz s InPage o ceny za viac ako 2000 Euro. Info na www.inpage.sk. > > Domena, > > > webhosting, e-mail a seo od 10 centov/denne. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > stunnel-users mailing list > > > stunnel-users(a)mirt.net > > > http://stunnel.mirt.net/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users > > > > > > > > ---------- > > Sutaz s InPage o ceny za viac ako 2000 Euro. Info na www.inpage.sk > > <http://www.inpage.sk/>. Domena, webhosting, e-mail a seo od 10 > > centov/denne. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > stunnel-users mailing list > > stunnel-users(a)mirt.net > > http://stunnel.mirt.net/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users > > > ---------- > Sutaz s InPage o ceny za viac ako 2000 Euro. Info na www.inpage.sk > <http://www.inpage.sk/>. Domena, webhosting, e-mail a seo od 10 > centov/denne. ---------- Sutaz s InPage o ceny za viac ako 2000 Euro. Info na www.inpage.sk. Domena, webhosting, e-mail a seo od 10 centov/denne.

1 0

Stunnel client hangs in background mode when smartcard is used
by John Abloyer 08 Jun '09

08 Jun '09

Hi! I have a problem when running ssh over stunnel in background mode ('foreground' out-commented in config file). In foreground mode, everything works fine. I'm using a modified OpenSSL, adding an engine that is dedicated to communicate with a smartcard reader. The scenario is: - Starting stunnel on server, extract from config file: [ssh] accept = myserver:122 connect = 22 - Starting stunnel on client, extract from config file: engine = myengine engineNum = 1 client = yes [ssh] accept = 22 connect = myserver:122 I come to here, than it hangs: ... 2009.06.08 15:08:22 LOG7[472:3054680976]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 read server certificate A 2009.06.08 15:08:22 LOG7[472:3054680976]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 read server certificate request A 2009.06.08 15:08:22 LOG7[472:3054680976]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 read server done A 2009.06.08 15:08:22 LOG7[472:3054680976]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 write client certificate A 2009.06.08 15:08:22 LOG7[472:3054680976]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 write client key exchange A - - - - - - - But when I run in foreground mode, it all works fine and stunnel continues and I get the ssh login prompt. I'm running RHEL 5.2, OpenSSL 0.9.8*, stunnel 4.27 Any help would be appreciated Rgds JA

1 0

start parameters
by Sebastian Rose-Indorf 07 Jun '09

07 Jun '09

Hello, a short question: Which start parameters are there for Stunnel v4.xx? Thanks, Seb. _ ASCII ribbon campaign against HTML e-mail ( ) & proprietary e-mail formats X / \ www.asciiribbon.org

1 0

Re: [stunnel-users] 1 server and more desktops
by aaa aaa 07 Jun '09

07 Jun '09

hello Christophe, thanks for your answer. Sorry for any misunderstanding. Well, I just wanted to ask if it is able to set stunnel for working with more certificates? So it means that I don't want to have secured tunnel between remote and local computer only but also between one remote and many local computers with more certificates? Every local computer should have own certificate. Is this possible? thank you. ---- Pôvodná správa ---- Od koho: Christophe Nanteuil <christophe.nanteuil(a)gmail.com> Komu: aaa aaa <miamia(a)inmail.sk> Dátum: 7. 6. 2009 16:27:00 Predmet: Re: [stunnel-users] 1 server and more desktops Hello, Stunnel is an application oriented tunnel, not a machine oriented tunnel. Please, be more precise in your requests if you want someone to be able to help you. It seems also that the stunnel documentation pages are worh reading in your case. Regards, -- Christophe 2009/6/7 aaa aaa <miamia(a)inmail.sk>: > Hello, > > I have one server and 3 desktops (PC1,PC2,PC3). I need to do this: every pc > should communicate with server with his own certificate and server should > sends anwser back to the computer encrypted for this one pc only. > > Example: PC3 {with server's public key} sends data to server and server > sends answer to PC3 (encrypted wiht unique PC3's public key). > then PC2 {with server's public key} sends data to server and server sends > answer to PC2 (encrypted wiht unique PC2's public key). and so on... how > should I configure stunnel for this? > > And another question > how should I configure all computers (server, > pc1,pc2,pc3) to accept communication over secured stunnel only and drop all > other unsecured communication? > > > thank you in advance. > regards, Mia > ---------- > Sutaz s InPage o ceny za viac ako 2000 Euro. Info na www.inpage.sk. Domena, > webhosting, e-mail a seo od 10 centov/denne. > > _______________________________________________ > stunnel-users mailing list > stunnel-users(a)mirt.net > http://stunnel.mirt.net/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users > > ---------- Sutaz s InPage o ceny za viac ako 2000 Euro. Info na www.inpage.sk. Domena, webhosting, e-mail a seo od 10 centov/denne.

1 0

stunnel through httpd
by Chatty 07 Jun '09

07 Jun '09

Hello, I've got the crazy idea to run stunnel behind an existing, SSL-enabled, basic-auth-using httpd. Configuration would be as follows: 1. put some stunnel.cgi into /usr/www/cgi-bin which would call stunnel binary 2. start stunnel client with -r https://login:passwd@myhost.org/cgi-bin/stunnel.cgi Advantages (assumed you're behind a proxy which allows only 443 as outgoing port): a. You can still access other WebIFs on that server. b. You don't have to administer another web server including authentication, certificates and so on. May be stunnel is not the best tool for the above scenario (I reckon stunnel is currently unable to fulfill this)... I hope someone can shed some light on this. Cheers, Chatty.

1 0

1 server and more desktops
by aaa aaa 07 Jun '09

07 Jun '09

Hello, I have one server and 3 desktops (PC1,PC2,PC3). I need to do this: every pc should communicate with server with his own certificate and server should sends anwser back to the computer encrypted for this one pc only. Example: PC3 {with server's public key} sends data to server and server sends answer to PC3 (encrypted wiht unique PC3's public key). then PC2 {with server's public key} sends data to server and server sends answer to PC2 (encrypted wiht unique PC2's public key). and so on... how should I configure stunnel for this? And another question > how should I configure all computers (server, pc1,pc2,pc3) to accept communication over secured stunnel only and drop all other unsecured communication? thank you in advance. regards, Mia ---------- Sutaz s InPage o ceny za viac ako 2000 Euro. Info na www.inpage.sk. Domena, webhosting, e-mail a seo od 10 centov/denne.

2 1

securing OpenBSD/FreeBSD with stunnel
by aaa aaa 07 Jun '09

07 Jun '09

Hello guys, I would like to secure my OpenBSD/FreeBSD for communication over stunnel only. How should I configure BSD and stunnel when I want allow comminucation with one server only (data from pc encrypted with server's public certificate and allow data from this server to my pc encrypted with pc's public key) and drop all other communication (all other ports and certificates)? thank you, mia ---------- Sutaz s InPage o ceny za viac ako 2000 Euro. Info na www.inpage.sk. Domena, webhosting, e-mail a seo od 10 centov/denne.

1 0