On 3/8/22 17:56, Aaron Dewell wrote:
Ok, with a bit more messing with it... Changing bump to splice does work:
ssl_bump splice all
Noted.
Adding:
acl step2 at_step SslBump2
ssl_bump peek step1
ssl_bump peek step2
ssl_bump splice step2
The above is a bad configuration because no rule matches during step3.
Please try this configuration instead, to make sure you are not seeing a
side effect of various Squid bugs related to such configurations (we are
working on fixing them):
ssl_bump peek all
ssl_bump splice all
If the above fails, please see my earlier suggestions about sharing test
artifacts. Otherwise, please try this:
ssl_bump stare all
ssl_bump bump all
If the above fails, please see my earlier suggestions about sharing test
artifacts. Otherwise, please try this:
ssl_bump peek step1
ssl_bump bump all
If the above fails, please see my earlier suggestions about sharing test
artifacts. Otherwise, you got a working config (which is the same config
you have started with, so I doubt you will get to this stage!).
This appears to be the relevant data from the log:
2022/03/08 14:35:47.644 kid1| 83,7| bio.cc(163) stateChanged: FD 10 now: 0x4004 TED (TLSv1.3 early data)
2022/03/08 14:35:47.644 kid1| 83,7| bio.cc(163) stateChanged: FD 10 now: 0x2002 SSLERR (error)
2022/03/08 14:35:47.644 kid1| Error negotiating SSL connection on FD 10: error:00000001:lib(0):func(0):reason(1) (1/-1)
YMMV, but I will need to see a lot more lines surrounding this snippet
to understand what exactly went wrong. That is why I am asking for the
entire transaction log rather than selected "error" lines.
Sharing a packet capture might be sufficient if this is a basic
misconfiguration error -- we will see wrong protocol traffic on one of
both Squid sides. You can start with that (often, but not always, safer
as far as sensitive info disclosure) step if you prefer.
HTH,
Alex.
On Mar 8 2022, at 2:57 pm, Alex Rousskov wrote:
On 3/8/22 16:38, Aaron Dewell wrote:
> Hi Alex, thanks for your reply! I did get access to the parent proxy
> and my assumption was wrong, it's doing minimal bumping.
TLS inspection at the parent proxy does not affect what I was trying to
double check. What matters is whether it is a forward HTTP proxy (e.g.,
a Squid instance listening on an http_port configured without intercept,
tproxy, or accel flags). It sounds like that is what it is. That's OK!
I do not remember whether your Squid version (v4.13) supports SslBump
with parent forward proxies, but I believe modern Squids do, and we can
assume that your Squid version does as well. The debugging should show
whether that is indeed the case.
> The parent is doing peek and splice to an exact list of internal
> destinations. Specifically, peek step1 all, peek step2
allowed_sites,
> splice allowed_sites, terminate all. That shouldn't (to my imperfect
> knowledge) interfere with what I'm doing though.
Yes, assuming the parent does not terminate your Squid connections, of
course (i.e. assuming connections from your Squid always match
allowed_sites after step1 at the parent proxy).
> That's a good idea to do splice only and see if that's successful.
> Trying to do too much at once! I'll see what that does, then try
debug
> again. The debug output wasn't very helpful before, but stepwise
may be
> more useful.
Just to clarify: The debugging output was not meant for you to
interpret. A Squid developer should do that. It may contain sensitive
details; it is best to not use anything but test traffic and test
certificate keys when sharing ALL,9 output.
Alex.
> On Mar 8 2022, at 1:43 pm, Alex Rousskov wrote:
>
> On 3/8/22 14:16, Aaron Dewell wrote:
>
> > I'm trying to use these two features at the same time. The use
> case is
> > pretty simple. I want to capture all traffic from a single
source (a
> > device of mine) to another squid proxy server and decrypt/log
> it. I'm
> > using the Ubuntu 20 package of squid-ssl version 4.13.
> >
> > Device -> ssl_bump proxy -> upstream proxy -> website
> >
> > It was all successfully working without ssl_bump, so the cache_peer
> > configuration works. One side note: the parent proxy is running
> on 443
> > without SSL (I believe - I don't run it but I've asked those that
> do for
> > confirmation, but I do know it's a pretty standard destination
proxy
> > configuration).
> >
> > The website itself is not directly accessible thus the upstream
> proxy is
> > required.
> >
> > Adding the ssl_bump configuration caused it to not work, with
errors
> > about SSL versions and "Error negotiating SSL connection on FD
> xx". My
> > best guess is that it is attempting to establish an SSL
connection to
> > the upstream and failing.
> >
> > acl step1 at_step SslBump1
> > ssl_bump peek step1
> > ssl_bump bump all
> > http_port 3128 ssl-bump cert=/var/lib/squid/ssl_cert/myCA.pem
> > generate-host-certificates=on dynamic_cert_mem_cache_size=4MB
> > tls_outgoing_options options=NO_SSLv3
> > flags=DON'T_VERIFY_PEER,DONT_VERIFY_DOMAIN
> > cert=/var/lib/squid/ssl_cert/device.pem
> > key=/var/lib/squid/ssl_cert/client.key
> >
> > (client.key and client.pem are from the device and are needed due
> to the
> > authentication of the session at the destination server. Also, I
> > haven't looked at the packet logging yet. I assume that will be
> an easy
> > addition once the setup works generally.)
> >
> > However, my understanding is that the cache_peer configuration
should
> > NOT do TLS by default unless that was specified in the options,
and I
> > see no way to explicitly disable it.
> >
> > So first question: is that assumption accurate? No TLS to the
parent
> > unless explicitly configured?
>
> Yes, that is correct: cache_peers are plain HTTP forward proxies
unless
> explicitly configured otherwise. Their listening port value does
carry
> any special meaning as far as Squid code is concerned.
>
> However, it is very unusual to run a plain HTTP forward proxy on port
> 443. That port may imply that your parent proxy is an HTTPS reverse
> proxy. If it is, you need to use originserver flag when
configuring the
> corresponding cache_peer line. You can check by sending plain CONNECT
> requests to that upstream proxy using wget, curl, or some such. A
> reverse HTTPS proxy would reject such requests.
>
>
> > if the ssl_bump configuration is causing it to attempt an upstream
> > TLS connection ...
>
> Bugs notwithstanding, it should not.
>
>
> > Anything here that I'm doing obviously wrong?
>
> I see no red flags relevant to your specific question.
>
> Does replacing "bump all" with "splice all" fix the problem? I
realize
> that you do want to bump/see the device traffic, but I wonder whether
> the errors are not between Squid and the upstream proxy but Squid and
> the web site. Splicing would remove those errors while still keeping
> some SslBump code active.
>
> Sharing a (pointer to compressed) libpcap packet capture and/or a
> (pointer to compressed) ALL,9 cache.log while reproducing the problem
> with a single transaction may help:
>
https://wiki.squid-cache.org/SquidFaq/BugReporting#Debugging_a_single_transaction
>
> Alex.
> _______________________________________________
> squid-users mailing list
> squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
>
> Sent from Mailspring
Sent from Mailspring
_______________________________________________
squid-users mailing list
squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
