I was curious on why a client cannot directly to a machine running webrtc server but can do that via turn server. Both turn & webrtc are in same VPC of AWS.
Could be a lot of things.
Assuming you have the TURN configuration file correct, and as you are noting both AWS instances have public IPs, then it's possible that on the instance with the TURN server, you do not have all the firewall ports opened needed related to the TURN server: https://stackoverflow.com/a/59212004/8201657
Or, maybe it's a DNS issue and the domain of your TURN server is unknown to your peer, so it is not able to access it.
Or, maybe you are attempting to connect via WebRTC but not securely. WebRTC requires a secure connnection (https).
Related
The question says it all. But to elaborate.
I have a oracle db running at some remote host. ip: 10.0.0.121 port: 1521
It can be accessed when I connect to a windows remote desktop machine.
Now how can I connect to this remote db from my local machine?
I believe that localtunnel is similar to telebit in that you get an encrypted https connection, not a plain tcp connection (which is good).
If I understand correctly, you'll want to use localtunnel (or telebit or perhaps even ngrok) on the windows machine to expose its database connection to the outside world. You'll want to use https (and absolutely not tcp or http which would leak database passwords and all your data) to create the tunnel.
Then you'll need to run something like sclient (or stunnel) on the computer that's doing the connecting to "unwrap" the https connection back to plain tcp. It might look like this:
sclient example.localtunnel.me:443 localhost:1521
In your database client or application you would then use localhost:1521 in your database connection string (not the https address).
This gives you the security of an encrypted connection and the convenience of exposing ports out to the world, all without adding any complexity to your application or client - you just run it as normal, connecting to localhost.
Comment if you need any additional clarification.
I have a set up I would like to implement but just not sure on the details. As you can see in the image below I have a single VPS in the web which I would like to use as a gateway to a number of locally running web servers. Im using the VPN to hide the IP/location of the server farm while maintaining the ability to host locally.
What I am not sure on is the implementation as I have never used a VPN before. My understanding is that I can host the VPN server on the server farm, have the VPS connect to it which will give me another 'local' network interface which I can then use apache to proxy traffic through?
The server farm is basically a small Kubernetes cluster give or take a little.
Is my understanding correct and can you offer any advice on implementaion?
Thanks in advance!
server farm example image
The VPN server should have two network interfaces. The first is the public interface that connects to the Internet and the second is the local interface that connects to the server farm. All the servers in the farm should connect only to the local interface and have the gateway set as the VPN server.
You can use the Reverse Proxy functionality in Apache to route incoming traffic to the appropriate server. See Reverse Proxy Guide
I have set up a LAMP server on a Raspberry Pi on my home network. I would like to expose the pi to the internet by opening up ports 22 and 80 on my router so i can ssh into it as well as use any web services i set up on it.
This is a little pet project I'm using to learn more about networking, server setup and linux in general - with only a cheap RPi which i can wipe and start again easily anything goes wrong. I do plan to put it on a separate subnet to the other devices on the home network, just in case.
(Yes, i know this is a little much for a raspberry pi - this is just a learning exercise and a proof of concept before i throw money at this to build a rig for it)
My understanding is that SSH is already secure, so i don't have to worry about my username and password being seen across the web when i want a terminal session.
My concern is that if i send anything to a web service (such as a wordpress or phpmyadmin password) it'll be clear to see on the web. How can i stop this?
My plan was SSL, but from what I've read, an SSL certificate needs a domain name for a certificate to be issued by most places. When all I'll be doing is pointing to a static IP from my ISP on the devices I'll be using.
The other use i have planned for it is as a mysql server for my kodi boxes to use for the library data so my devices can share data (the videos live on another server running windows). So other devices on a local network need to be allowed access to mysql easily without the silly level of security the internet-side requires. I assume this will be easily possable alongside my other use cases as I'd not be opening the port for it on the router and the only things that would access msql are local network devices, and services on the mysql host itself
Are any of my assumptions or conclusions wrong?
Are there any better ways to achieve what I'm after than what I'm describing?
Is there a preferred way to interact with the Pi if i just wanted it to set off a specific script? (say send a wake-on-lan packet to a specific computer)
Is there a way for me to have the web server onllly communicate with specific devices that i have the appropriate keys/certificates loaded onto so that i can be certain that I'm the only one with access?
Are any of my assumptions or conclusions wrong?
Using a username/password combo for SSH is probably secure enough, but it's generally more secure to use a public/private SSH key pair.
Your assumptions about MySQL seem sound. Just make sure to have some authentication on the server just in case you have a nosey houseguest on your WiFi. :)
Are there any better ways to achieve what I'm after than what I'm
describing?
A couple options that come to mind:
You could generate a self-signed certificate for the web server and then manually copy that onto your client devices. I think this would allow you to get around the requirement for a domain name.
You could set up a secure VPN into your home network. This way you wouldn't have to expose your web/SSH servers to the world.
Is there a way for me to have the web server only communicate with
specific devices that i have the appropriate keys/certificates loaded
onto so that i can be certain that I'm the only one with access?
The VPN option mentioned earlier would allow you to do this.
You could restrict access to the Apache server to only devices with specific client certificates: https://stackoverflow.com/a/24543642/2384183
I want to implement a restund server for WebRTC audio on my website. I wish to have one user be able to talk to all the other users on the platform (if anyone knows an easier way to do this than implementing a restund WebRTC server, please let me know, would help me out a lot).
But before I go and try to get restund working, I was wondering if it could be installed to work alongside my Apache HTTP dedicated server I use to host my website.
Well, STUN/TURN services are running on ports 3478 and 5349 by default. That should not conflict with those required for HTTP operations (e.g. 80, 443, 8080). So yes, this should be possible.
Not sure if i'm really up-to-date, but i'm looking in a way to convert my existing project to use HTML5 websockets.
Here's my situation :
- Client runs a modified java vnc applet with extra parameter (CONNECT).
- Modified stunnel listenin on webserver (with both public, private IP) port 443
- Client connects to 443 and sends (prior to RFB) a HTTP packet like :
'CONNECT 10.0.0.1:4001'
- Stunnel opens a new stream to 10.0.0.1:4001 using SSL wrapper
- VNC Server (#10.0.0.1:4001) responds, connection is established.
Now I want to get rid of the Java Applet and switch to Websocket using NoVNC.
I want to be able to :
- Open a single port on the webserver (HTTPS preferably)
- Have client connect using HTML5 only (no more java applet)
I cannot change :
- VNCServer will still be listening on private LAN only.
- VNCServer will still listen to a bunch of ports, each corresponding to
a virtual server
Questions are :
- How to give NoVNC the notion of target HOST:PORT ?
- Is stunnel still be usable ? Or should I change to websocket proxy ?
If anyone has a starting point, i'd really appreciate !
Disclaimer: I created noVNC so my answer may be heavily biased ;-)
I'll answer you second question first:
stunnel cannot be used directly by noVNC. The issue is that the WebSockets protocol has an HTTP-like initial handshake and the messages are framed. In addition, until binary payload support is added to WebSockets, the payload is base64 encoded by the websockets proxy (websockify). Adding the necessary support to stunnel would be non-trivial but certainly doable. In fact noVNC issue #37 is an aspirational feature to add this support to stunnel.
First question:
noVNC already has a concept of HOST:PORT via the RFB.connect(host, port, password) method. The file vnc_auto.html at the top level shows how to get noVNC to automatically connect on page load based on the host, port and password specified as URL query string parameters.
However, I think what you are really asking is how do you get noVNC to connect to alternate VNC server ports on the backend. This problem is not directly addressed by noVNC and websockify. There are several ways to solve this and it usually involves an out-of-band setup/authorization mechanism so that the proxy can't be used to launch attacks by arbitrary hosts. For example, at my company we have a web based management framework that integrates noVNC and when the user wants to connect to the console, an authenticated AJAX call is used to configure the proxy for that particular user and the system they want to connect to. Our web management interface is internal only.
Ganeti Web Manager uses a similar model and the source is available. They have a fork of VNCAuthProxy that has WebSockets support. They use a control channel from the web interface to the VNCAuthProxy to setup a temporary password associated with a specific VNC server host:port.
Also OpenStack (Nova) integrates noVNC uses a similar out-of-band token based model to allow access with their nova-vncproxy.
Some links:
Ganeti Web Manager
Wiki page about how noVNC works in Ganeti Web Manager
Ganeti Web Manager sources
Ganeti Web Manager VNCAUthProxy sources
Using noVNC in Nova/OpenStack
OpenStack fork of noVNC
Old nova-vnc-proxy code
Current nova vnc proxy code