I am trying to build a solution for deployment to a manufacturing test environment where security is not a concern. I have an embedded system under test that offers up a web interface. This web interface uses a self-signed certificate and that's not going to change.
I would like to be able to connect to this device, and using any kind of one-off certificate accepting process is not a viable solution, since every device under test would require a separate certificate based on it having a different MAC address.
My question is, can I run Firefox with either command line arguments or some kind of configuration that tells it to completely ignore certificates? Alternatively, is there a way I can create a certificate exemption that ignores the MAC address of the device and says to accept the certificates from ANY device at a specific IP address? Alternatively, is there another browser I can use that might not care about certificates?
Related
I have a web service which is secured through HTTPS. I also have client software which talks to this web service, using libcurl (which may be linked to OpenSSL, or linked to GnuTLS; I don't know which one, it depends on how the user installed libcurl). Because the web service is only ever accessed through the client software and never through the browser, the web service utilizes a self-signed certificate. The client software, in turn, has a copy of this self-signed certificate and explicitly checks the connection against that certificate.
Because of Heartbleed, I want to change the private key and certificate. However I want my users to experience as little service disruption as possible.
For this reason, I cannot change the key/certificate on a fixed date and time. If I do this then all users must upgrade their client software at that exact date and time. Otherwise, the upgraded client software won't work before the server change, while old versions of the client software won't work after the server change.
Ideally, I want to tell my users that I'm going to change the certificate in 1 month, and that they have 1 month time to upgrade the client software. The client software should be compatible with both the old and the new certificate. Then, after 1 month, I can issue another client software update which removes support for the old certificate.
So now we've come to my question: can I append the old certificate and the new certificate into a single .crt file? Will this cause libcurl to accept both certificates? If not, what should I do instead? Does the behavior depend on the SSL library or version?
Tests on OS X seem to indicate that appending both certificates into a single file works, but I don't know whether this is OS X-specific behavior, or whether it works everywhere. My client software has to support a wide range of Unix systems, including Linux (multiple distros) and FreeBSD.
Short answer: You can't.
Long answer:
Yes you can put multiple certificates in a single .crt file, regardless of platforms.
However HTTPS can only serve one certificate, instead of a crt file. So it's not the file that is limiting you, it's the protocol.
You could have a look at SNI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication
to be able to serve another certificate based on the SNI information sent by the client at the beginning of the SSL Handshake
Alternatively, you could use a separate TCP port (or IP, or both) that will serve the new certificate.
But you say
The client software, in turn, has a copy of this self-signed certificate and explicitly checks the connection against that certificate.
This then requires you to release a version of your software for your clients to run, to at least have the copy of the new certificate you are going to use.
I guess you should better use a certificate signed by well-known CA, to decouple your server certificate from its validation chain, but that indeed means paying.
Yes a cert file should be able to hold multiple certificates. I would expect this to be broadly supported.
I'm interested to purchase a wild card SSL certificate for my public domain (say example.com), so that we can run intranet web servers using a universally recognized CA (e.g., GoDaddy). I do plan to publish the DNS names publicly (e.g. internal.example.com), but their IP addresses are actually LAN addresses (e.g., 192...*). We want to use public DNS, because these web servers may actually be development laptops which travel around, and thus we will use Dynamic DNS to update. It's our intention that these web servers will only be available on the LAN each one is currently running on.
Will that work universally with all clients, e.g., TLS v1.2 ?
Thanks.
As long as the clients can route their traffic to these IP addresses, it will work (otherwise you won't get the connection, of course).
Certificate verification relies on two points:
Verifying that the certificate is genuine, trusted and valid in time.
Verifying that the identity of the certificate matches what you were looking for (host name verification).
This does not depend on how the DNS resolution mechanism. These mechanisms are also orthogonal to the SSL/TLS specifications (although they do recommend to verify the remote party's identity).
I've seen this sort of setup used on various clients and platforms (IE, Chrome, FF, Java clients on Windows/Linux/Mac) and it worked fine.
Of course, whether all implementations do this well is hard to guarantee. There might be some implementation that thinks it's a good idea to perform a reverse DNS lookup, for example.
I have a Server and N number of clients installed on different hosts. Each host has its self-signed certificate generated during install. The client authentication is turned ON at this point. Which means they can't communicate to each other until these certs are properly imported as described below.
Now, the server needs to import all the clients' certificates. So do all the clients from this single server. This part is really not user friendly to do it during install as either client or the server can be installed independent of each other any time.
What is the better way to import certs between clients and server without the user having to perform some kind of out-of-band manual steps?
PS: The PKI tool I am using can only import/export certificates on a local machine only. Assume I can't change this tool at this time.
In general, this is one of the problems with PKI. It is a pain to securely distribute certificates in an automated fashion.
In an Active Directory domain environment you already have a Kerberos trust in place. Therefore you can use group policy to securely distribute certficates automatically. Don't know if that would apply to you because you haven't given information about your environment/OS etc.
We're having an issue with securing an intranet / internet website with SSL where
we can't know the qualified domain name in advance.
Basically, I'm trying to make a program that will be installed on a webserver
outside my direct control, to be accessable over intra- or internet. In either case
I want it to be secure via SSL (https). To do this, I would like to include and
install a SSL certificate on the target machine. My installer is fully prepackaged
and should not require any particular during- or postinstall intervention from my
end. Problem is, I can't know ahead of time the target machine's name or domain
name, so as far as I can tell the SSL connection will be returning warnings (or
worse?) when accessed, since the certificate I include will (must) have a different
name on it.
I really want to avoid those warnings, but I still want to keep it secure. Is there
any way to install a SSL connection without certificate warnings without the domain
name known ahead of time?
Thanks for any help you folks can give.
What you want to do is not possible. Here's why.
A certificate will include a set of names (Common Name, possibly along with Subject Alternative Names, possibly including wildcard names).
The client's web browser will do the following:
The user wanted to visit "https://myapp.mydomain.com/blog/posts/1".
The request is via SSL and the domain name in the request is "myapp.mydomain.com".
Get the certificate from the Web server.
Ensure that at least one of the names in the certificate is exactly equal to, or wildcard-matches, the domain name in the request.
Display the page.
Therefore, you need a certificate with the exact domain name (or a wildcard matching the exact domain name) by which the application will be used. And the certificate needs to be available at the same time as, or later than, the time when the exact domain name of the website becomes known, and cannot be made available any earlier.
You seem to be under the misapprehension that somehow a certificate can "create" or "install" an SSL connection. That is false. The Web server - Apache, IIS, Nginx, LigHTTPD, or whichever one you happen to use - is the program that knows how to every aspect of SSL connectivity. The certificate is just a file that the Web server sends to the client, without even opening or using in any way.
Additionally, the author of a webapp to be distributed is not responsible for creating or distributing certificates, and should not be under the misapprehension that he is responsible. Only the website maintainer should be responsible for obtaining a certificate for his website. As another person remarked, in your installation process or perhaps in a post-installation process, you may ask the person installing the webapp for a certificate. But that is the best you can do.
The best you can do is to buy a wildcard SSL certificate - but wait, it's not what you think. You still need to know the second-level domain (the TLD being ".com") ahead of time. You can effectively ask for a cert that covers *.foo.com - then any site, a.foo.com, b.foo.com will be covered. Of course, these certs are more expensive that FQDN certs because you are doing the buggers out of some extra coin.
-Oisin
Each of those sites should have their own SSL certificate. Why not prompt the user to provide the cert file during installation?
In most (if not all) cases, the SSL certificate is associated with the webserver (apache, IIS, etc.) and is not part of your application. It's up to the admin of the web server to install the certificate and not you as the author of the program.
If your installation program does have the ability to modify the web server configuration, and you are willing to have it use a self-signed certificate, you can script the creation of the certificate to allow the domain name to be input. However, I sense this is not really available to you. Also, a self-signed certificate will generally cause certificate warnings.
If I understand you correctly there might be a solution to your problem now. This solution won't help you, however, if you have no control over specifying what SSL certificates are served from the web server where your program is installed (as mentioned by someone else). If your program itself contains a web server you won't have this issue.
If you start with a trusted https website, you can make cross-domain TLS (SSL) XmlHttpRequests to the web servers that are running your application. This is made possible using the opensource Forge project. The project uses a TLS implementation written in JavaScript and a small Flash swf to handle the cross-domain requests. Your program will need to serve an XML Flash policy file that grants the trusted website access to the web server running the application.
Your program will also need to generate a self-signed SSL certificate and upload it to the trusted website. From there, each program's certificate can be included as trusted via the JavaScript TLS implementation. Alternatively, you can have your program upload its certificate to be signed by a CA you create, using a common or subject alternative name that is appropriate for your use (it doesn't have to be the domain name). Then you can use JavaScript to trust the CA certificate and look for the correct name on each certificate.
For more details check out the Forge project at github:
http://github.com/digitalbazaar/forge/blob/master/README
The links to the blog posts at the end provide more in-depth information about how it works.
I'm setting up a webserver for a system that needs to be used only through HTTPS, on an internal network (no access from outside world)
Right now I got it setup with a self-signed certificate, and it works fine, except for a nasty warning that all browsers fire up, as the CA authority used to sign it is naturally not trusted.
Access is provided by a local DNS domain name resolved on local DNS server (example: https://myapp.local/), that maps that address to 192.168.x.y
Is there some provider that can issue me a proper certificate for use on an internal domain name (myapp.local)? Or is my only option to use a FQDN on a real domain, and later map it to a local IP address?
Note: I would like an option where it's not needed to mark the server public key as trusted on each browser, as I have not control over workstations.
You have two practical options:
Stand up your own CA. You can do it with OpenSSL and there's a lot of Google info out there.
Keep using your self-signed cert, but add the public key to your trusted certs in the browser. If you're in an Active Directory domain, this can be done automatically with group policy.
I did the following, which worked nicely for me:
I got a wildcard SSL cert for *.mydomain.com (Namecheap, for example, provide this cheaply)
I created a CNAME DNS record pointing "mybox.mydomain.com" at "mybox.local".
I hope that helps - unfortunately you'll have the expense of a wildcard cert for your domain name, but you may already have that.
You'd have to ask the typical cert people for that. For ease of use I'd get with the FQDN though, you might use a subdomain to your already registered one: https://mybox.example.com
Also you might want to look at wildcard certificates, providing a blanket cert for (e.g.) https://*.example.com/ - even usable for virtual hosting, should you need more than just this one cert.
Certifying sub- or sub-sub domains of FQDN should be standard business - maybe not for the point&click big guys that proud themselves to provide the certificates in just 2 minutes.
In short: To make the cert trusted by a workstation you'd have to either
change settings on the workstations (which you don't want) or
use an already trusted party to sign your key (which you're looking for a way around).
That's all your choices. Choose your poison.
I would have added this as a comment but it was a bit long..
This is not really an answer to your questions, but in practice I've found that it's not recommended to use a .local domain - even if it's on your "local" testing environment, with your own DNS Server.
I know that Active Directory uses the .local name by default when your install DNS, but even people at Microsoft say to avoid it.
If you have control over the DNS Server you can use a .com, .net, or .org domain - even if it's internal and private only. This way, you could actually buy the domain name that you are using internally and then buy a certificate for that domain name and apply it to your local domain.
I had a similar requirement, have our companys browsers trust our internal websites.
I didnt want our public DNS to issue public DNS for our internal sites, so the only way to make this work that I found was to use an internal CA.
Heres the writeup for this,
https://medium.com/#mike.reider/getting-firefox-chrome-to-trust-your-internal-websites-internal-certificate-authority-a53ba2d4c2af
i think the answer is NO.
out-of-the-box, browsers won't trust certificates unless it's ultimately been verified by someone pre-programmed into the browser, e.g. verisign, register.com.
you can only get a verified certificate for a globally unique domain.
so i'd suggest instead of myapp.local you use myapp.local.yourcompany.com, for which you should be able to get a certificate, provided you own yourcompany.com. it'll cost you thought, several hundred per year.
also be warned wildcard certificates might only go down to one level -- so you could use it for a.yourcompany.com and local.yourcompany.com but maybe not b.a.yourcompany.com or myapp.local.yourcompany.com, unless you pay more.
(does anyone know, does it depend on the type of wildcard certificate? are sub-sub-domains trusted by the major browsers?)
Development purpose only
This docker image solves the problem (thanks to local-ip.co): https://github.com/medic/nginx-local-ip.
It launches a reverse proxy in the port 443 with a public cert that works with any *.my.local-ip.co domain. Eg. your local IP is 192.168.10.10 → 192-168-10-10.my.local-ip.co already points to it (it's a public domain)! Assuming the app is running in your computer at the port 8080, you only need to execute this to proxy pass your app and expose it at the URL https://192-168-10-10.my.local-ip.co:
$ APP_URL=http://192.168.10.10:8080 docker-compose up
The domain is resolved with any public DNS you have configured in the devices where you want to access the app, but your traffic keeps local between your app and the client (through the proxy), so you can even use it to connect with devices within the same LAN network, without any of the traffic going out to internet, all the traffic is local.
The reason that is mostly useful for development is that anybody can launch an application with this same certificate, so is not really secure, but helpful when you need to expose your app with HTTPS while developing or testing (e.g. HTML5 apps in Android that are loaded with Webview).