I have recently started to develop a tiny SIP softphone application using the PJ Project and GTK+. My main goal was to create a softphone which supports both TLS and SRTP encryption (and MWI). However I have got stuck right at the part where the library registers an account because the application has failed to verify the server when I asked it for it.
I thought that I misunderstood something while I was coding as I'm a newbie but today I've just tested the library using the PJSUA application which was attached in the source code and it could register my SIP account unless I've started the program with the --tls-verify-server flag.
To make it clear I've created for Asterisk my own certificate authority, keys and certificate and I've installed the CA to my machine.
I must note that this setup works with a commercial software, it can verify the certificate without any problem.
The PJSUA flags I've used:
--use-tls
--tls-ca-file /etc/ssl/certs/ca-certificates.crt
--id=sip:u-kuklinistvan1#kingdom.info.tm;transport=tls
--registrar=sip:kingdom.info.tm;transport=tls
--realm=kingdom.info.tm
--username=u-kuklinistvan1
--password=xxxxxx
--use-srtp=2
--mwi
--tls-verify-server
It says(please follow the link for the long version):
19:21:44.728 pjsua_app.c TLS cert verification result of [94.21.11.229:5061] : The server identity does not match to any identities specified in the certificate
...which could not be true as OpenSSL itself accepts the certificate:
openssl s_client -CAfile /etc/ssl/certs/ca-certificates.crt -connect kingdom.info.tm:5061
(click here for the rest)
Verify return code: 0 (ok)
Extra information
I connect PJSUA as endpoint to registrar by hostname kingdom.info.tm.
Is it possible that I've encountered a bug or I just don't understand something?
Thank you for your help!
... does not match to any identities specified in the certificate
... which could be not true as OpenSSL itself accepts the certificate: ... openssl s_client ...
The error messages refers to checking the identity against the certificate, i.e. the hostname you provide against the names in the certificate (subject alternative names, common name). openssl s_client does not do any identity checks but only checks for a valid trust chain.
Looking at the certificate provided by the server it actually contains contain a common name for kingdom.info.tm. But from the error message it looks that it expects the IP address: TLS cert verification result of [94.21.11.229:5061]: .... Did you specify the SIP URL of the peer with an IP address?
Related
We have an Microsoft Active Directory Domain with a large pool of domain controllers (DC) that are are setup with LDAP. These are all setup with LDAPS and uses Certificate Services via a template to setup a certificate with the domain name (i.e. test.corp) in the Subject Alternate Name (SAN) for the LDAPS server to serve.
Since these are DC's, DNS is setup in a pool for each these systems to respond to requests to test.corp in a round robin fashion.
Each of these DC's have multiple templates and multiple certificates in the Local Computer\Personal Certificate Store.
Upon testing, using a nodejs module, ldapjs when making a LDAPS request using the domain name, test.corp we notice that a handful of servers fail with the following message:
Error [ERR_TLS_CERT_ALTNAME_INVALID]: Hostname/IP does not match
certificate's altnames: Host: test.corp. is not in the cert's
altnames: othername:, DNS:.test.corp
As we investigated we found that these handful of LDAPS servers are serving the incorrect certificate. We determined this by using the following command
openssl s_client -connect .test.corp:636
If you take the certificate section of the output and put it in a file and use a tool such as the Certificate manager or certutil to read the file, you can see the certificate is not the correct one. (It does not have the domain "test.corp" SAN). We also verified this by comparing the Serial Numbers
As we investigated, since we have DC's that have multiple certificates in the Local Computer\Personal Certificate store, we came across the following article:
https://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki/contents/articles/2980.ldap-over-ssl-ldaps-certificate.aspx
It suggests putting the certificate from the local computer\Personal certificate store to the Active Directory Domain Service\Personal store. We followed the steps outlined but we found the same results.
Upon further investigation, it was suggested to use a tool called ldp or adsiedit. We then proceeded to use these tools and spoofed the local machine's host file we were doing the test from, to point the domain (test.corp) to the ip's of one of the DC's that are giving us trouble. After a restart to clear any cache we tested the "ldp" and "adsiedit" tools to connect to test.corp. These systems did not report any errors.
We found this odd, we then ran the openssl command to see what certificate it was serving from this same system and we found it was still serving the incorrect certificate.
Upon further research, it appears that the "ldp" upon selecting the SSL checkbox and "adsiedit" tools were not compliant with RFC6125, specifically B.3
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6125#appendix-B.3
, which basically states the identity of the certificate must match the identity of the request otherwise the handshake would fail. This identity verification is done by using the certificate common name (CN) or the SAN.
Based on this appears the tools "ldp" and "adsiedit" are not conforming to the RFC6125 standard.
All this to say, we need to first fix the handful of domain controllers that are serving the correct certificate. We are open to suggestions since we have been working on this problem for the past few months. Second, is there a way to get the MS tools in question to work to the RFC6125 standard?
This has been moved to:
https://serverfault.com/questions/939515/ldaps-microsoft-active-directory-multiple-certificates-rfc6125
RFC6125 specifically states that it does not supersede existing RFCs. LDAP cert handling is defined in RFC4513. Outside of that, RFC6125 has significant flaws. See also https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1740070#c26
LDP will supposedly validate the SSL against the client store if you toggle the ssl checkbox on the connection screen.
That said, I'm not surprised that neither it nor ADSI edit enforce that part of the standard given they are often used to configure or repair broken configurations. Out of the box and without Certificate Services they use self signed certs on LDAPS. I would wager 80% of DCs never get a proper certificate for LDAP. If they enforced it most wouldn't be able to connect. A better design decision would have been to toggle off the validation.
I use a similar openssl command to verify my own systems. I think it's superior to LDP even if LDP were to validate the certificate. To save you some effort, I would suggest using this variant of the openssl command:
echo | openssl s_client -connect .test.corp:636 2>/dev/null | openssl x509 -noout -dates -issuer -subject -text
That should save you having to output to a file and having to read it with other tools.
I've found LDAPS on AD to be a huge pain for the exact reasons you describe. It just seems to pick up the first valid cert it can find. If you've already added it to the AD DS personal store, I'm not sure where else to suggest you go other than removing some of tother certs from the DCs computer store.
I'm looking for a service online, able to simulate an expiring SSL certificate. I know about badssl.com, but that only seems to include an expired certificate. What I'm looking to do is to call an endpoint with a certificate expiring in something like 5 days. Possible?
I do not know about an online service tailored to your needs (you could also try to contact badssl.com and ask them if they would be willing to add your test case, as it may profit others too), but locally you can run openssl s_server and configure it to use any local certificate you would have created to be in the situation you need to test.
From its manual:
The s_server command implements a generic SSL/TLS server which listens for connections on a given port using SSL/TLS.
and:
s_server can be used to debug SSL clients. To accept connections from a web browser the command:
openssl s_server -accept 443 -www
can be used for example.
Otherwise, if you are outside of the world wide web world:
If a connection request is established with an SSL client and neither the -www nor the -WWW option has been used then normally any data received from the client is displayed and any key presses will be sent to the client.
(and follows a list of special keys for special operations).
I want to use WinRM with https transport. I've bought a Comodo certificate (the error states I cannot use a self-signed certificate) with the Subject matching my FQDN (Full computer name in System) of my Windows 10 computer (not domain joined):
CN = my.domain.net
OU = PositiveSSL
OU = Domain Control Validated
When trying to create a https listener with the following command:
WinRm quickconfig -transport:https
I get the error message:
Error number: -2144108267 0x80338115
Cannot create a WinRM listener on HTTPS because this machine does not have an appropriate certificate. To be used for SSL, a certificate must have a CN matching the hostname, be appropriate for Server Authentication, and not be expired, revoked, or self-signed.
I've installed (doubleclick the *.crt file) the certificate in several stores (local machine / personal and Trusted Root Certification Authorities) but WinRM fails to create the https listener. The http listener is working OK.
Some extra info: When using certreq to try to install the *.cer certificate, I get the error:
Element not found. 0x80070490 (WIN32: 1168 ERROR_NOT_FOUND)
How do I get WinRM working with https?
Here is how I solved this issue:
create a SSL CSR using DigiCert Certificate Utility for Windows from digicert.com
use the generate CSR to request a certificate. I used versio.nl but I'll guess there are a lot of CA's out there
Install the certificate by double clicking it
go to the certificate manager for user
rightclick the certificate (it should me in the personal store) and export it
- follow the wizard and be sure to export the private key
install the newly exported certificate (mark the key as exportable and include all extended properties) in the local computer certificate store
Open an console (cmd) with administrator privilidges and type:
winrm create winrm/config/Listener?Address=*+Transport=HTTPS
#{Hostname="server.fqdn";CertificateThumbprint="YOURCERTIFICATETHUMPPRINT"}
This worked for me. Some things to check if it is not working:
is the certificate still valid (check the date range)
check if the certificate property 'Subject" has a CN value with the FQDN of your computer
check if the listener is installed (winrm e winrm/config/listener)
I took me a lot of hours to figure this out. I hope it will help some of you out there.
I also experienced this issue - the answer from RHAD was partially helpful, but I needed to use an entirely internally generated CA.
The problem was caused by the Key algorithm I had chosen. Using the same configuration, only changing the key it works:
Failed key: elliptic curve cryptography with the brainpoolP512t1 curve (in the certificate this showed as: Public Key Algorithm: id-ecPublicKey / ASN1 OID: brainpoolP512t1 )
Successful key: an RSA key: (in the certificate: RSA Public-Key: (4096 bit))
Hopefully this helps others with similar issues.
Sim800 supports SSL protocol. AT command "AT+CIPSSL" sets TCP to use SSL function.
In the "sim800_series_ssl_application_note_v1.01.pdf" is noted that: "Module will automatic begin SSL certificate after TCP connected."
My Problem: What is the exact meaning of the begin SSL certificate? what does sim800 do exactly? Does sim800 get SSL certificate from website? where does sim800 save SSL certificate?
As far as I know, SIM800 has some certificates in it and when you use a TCP+SSL or HTTP+SSL connection it will automatically use those certificates.
If those certificates are not ok for you, you will need to use an SD card, save there the certificates you want and use the command AT+SSLSETCERT to set the certificate you saved on your SD card. Here you can find how to use the File System.
Usually the certificates that come with the module are enough and you won't need this. But for example they didn't work for me when I tried to communicate with Azure via MQTT. I had to encrypt the data myself using wolfSSL library and send it using TCP without SSL.
Note: Not all SIM800 modules have SD card support.
There are a very few information about sim800 and ssl certificate on the web, and like you i got a lot of questions about it.
About your questions on how does sim800 get certificate and where does it save it, it seems, according to sim800_series_ssl_application_note_v1.01.pdf, that you can create (defining your own path), write and import a ssl certificate on your own with the AT+FSCREATE, AT+FSWRITE and AT+SSLSETCERT commands. An example is provided at the paragraph 3.10.
I'm sorry, i can't answer your other questions.
Anyway, if you get further informations about sim800 and ssl, i would be grateful if you share it with me.
When you use AT+CIPSSL you tell the SIM-module to use the SSL connection with TCP. When you use +CIPSTART command->
SIM module requests the TCP connection with the server through SSL.
Server sends the Server SSL certificate.
The authenticity of that certificate is checked with internal certificate authority certificate (The one that resides inside SIM-module) which is cryptographically connected with server certificate.
If the authenticity of certificate can not be confirmed SIM-module will close the connection unless you use the command AT+SSLOPT=0,0 (which forces the SIM-module to ignore invalid certificate authentication) prior to AT+CIPSSL command.
//Key exchange
SIM-module then encrypts it's master key (already inside SIM-module cannot be changed or read) with the public key (Which is part of the already sent server certificate) and sends it back to server.
Server then encrypts it's master key with SIM-module's master-key and sends it back to SIM-module. Key exchange is now complete as both (server and SIM-module) recieved master keys.
SIM-module currently doesn't support Client authentication which means that server cannot authenticate the client. That means there must be some other option of authentication (For example in MQTT that can be username and password that only client knows)
If you want your module to be able to authenticate server you will need to create the self-signed certificate for server and certificate authority certificate (for SIM-module) which is cryptographically connected to self-signed certificate and upload them to server and SIM-module (through AT+SSLSETCERT command from SD card).
If you only want to encrypt the data traffic you can ignore invalid certificate (AT+SSLOPT=0,0) as you will recieve publickey nevertheless. But if you want to be sure about server authenticity you will need to upload right certificate to module.
I have been trying to implement a very basic Boost SSL implementation to try and learn the basics. The server I want to communicate with had already given me their public key in plain text. I already put a lot of the other code (asynchronous connection, handshaking, etc) in.
I first tried to implement SSL without verification of their certificate using the following setup of the Boost SSL stream:
boost::asio::ssl::context ctxt(boost::asio::ssl::context::sslv23);
ctxt.set_verify_mode(boost::asio::ssl::verify_none);
This implementation worked fine and I was able to connect with the server. When I tried to implement the verification of the peer certificate, however, the handshaking fails. I tried using the following code:
boost::asio::ssl::context ctxt(boost::asio::ssl::context::sslv23);
ctxt.set_verify_mode(boost::asio::ssl::verify_peer);
ctxt.load_verify_file("peer.crt");
I put the "peer.crt" containing the public key (along with the -----BEGIN CERTIFICATE----- and -----END CERTIFICATE----- tags) in the directory where I am running my executable. For whatever reason the handshake now fails with the error code 336134278: certificate verify failed. I also tried putting the full path to the verify file in there but with no luck.
My questions are the following:
Where should I be specifying the file name for the verify file in load_verify_file? Is it simply in the directory where I am running my executable?
Am I not setting up the handshaking process with peer verification properly? I do not have my own verify callback as I assumed the peer verification would happen automatically if I specified it as such.
Should I be handling the certificate in a certain way by installing it or something like that?
Is there a better way of debugging this functionality? I am using VS10 and can only get to the ipp so I cannot actually view the verification taking place.
Any help is appreciated, thanks!
You should be able to use either a relative or absolute path.
Your use of set_verify_mode() and load_verify_file() looks fine. I have done exactly this in my own code. A default verify callback is used if you do not specify one.
You don't need to "install" the certificate.
I don't know of easy ways to debug boost::asio SSL connections, but you can use OpenSSL command line tools, such as s_client, to test connections. boost::asio uses OpenSSL under the hood.
I suspect that you don't have the entire certificate chain of certificates in your file. You can extract them from your server with (replace www.google.com:443 with your server and port):
openssl s_client -connect www.google.com:443 -showcerts
If you only wish to check some of the certificates, e.g. only the leaf certificate, you can use your own verify callback. An example of a custom callback, as well as a description of the verification modes and options are on this page.
A good place to start is the HTTP Client in asio examples.
Are you calling set_verify_callback on the socket with the callback function to verify the certificate? E.g.:
bool verify_certificate(bool preverified, boost::asio::ssl::verify_context& ctx)
{
char subject_name[256];
X509* cert = X509_STORE_CTX_get_current_cert(ctx.native_handle());
X509_NAME_oneline(X509_get_subject_name(cert), subject_name, 256);
return preverified;
}