I think you might be right re: pound linking to the wrong headers.

Any suggestions on fixing that part?

Rick

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Joe Gooch <[email protected]>
wrote:

> I don't... Based on our code (which you can verify in config.c) it's
> including the SSL_OP_NO_COMPRESSION directive, and 1.0.1p should include
> that directive.  My only guesses are pound isn't using the openssl
> development headers for 1.0.1p, it's linking to a shared library that isn't
> the one you just compiled, or it's linking statically to the wrong ssl
> library.
>
>
> --
> Joe
>
> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail transmission may contain confidential
> and legally privileged information that is intended only for the individual
> named in the e-mail address. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
> hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or reliance
> upon the contents of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you
> have received this e-mail transmission in error, please reply to the
> sender, so that proper delivery can be arranged, and please delete the
> message from your mail box.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From:  Rick Smith
> Reply-To:  "[email protected]"
> Date:  Friday, July 10, 2015 at 12:02 PM
> To:  "[email protected]"
> Subject:  Re: [Pound Mailing List] Crime vulnerability on 2.7f upstream
>
>
> I compiled 2.7f myself and also compiled the 1.01p openssl.
>
> Any idea why I still see TLS compression enabled?
>
> Rick
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Joe Gooch
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> TLS Compression was disabled in the code in pound 2.7b.  If you're running
> 2.7f, then at compile time, it will be disabled.  If your openssl-dev
> headers define the SSL_OP_NO_COMPRESSION directive, it uses that,
> otherwise, it uses other workarounds, and in both
>  cases it disabled empty fragments.
>
>
> https://github.com/goochjj/pound/commit/c1fe61a96da606d812d9c4edbacb538f9bf8544b
>
>
> Other distributions... Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora -  disable TLS compression
> at the library level.  If you're using openssl compiled yourself, it may
> not have this patch.  Or perhaps you're not using the correct openssl
> headers to compile?
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openssl/+bug/1187195
>
>
> A lot of these best practices (other than using the 2.6 pcidss branch,
> which shouldn't be necessary anymore) also apply
> http://www.apsis.ch/pound/pound_list/archive/2014/2014-10/1414097953000
>
>
> My sites all show A's, unless I have HSTS enabled.  Those show A+.
>
> --
> Joe
>
> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail transmission may contain confidential
> and legally privileged information that is intended only for the individual
> named in the e-mail address. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
> hereby notified that any disclosure,
>  copying, distribution, or reliance upon the contents of this e-mail
> message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail
> transmission in error, please reply to the sender, so that proper delivery
> can be arranged, and please delete the message from
>  your mail box.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From:  Rick Smith
> Reply-To:  "[email protected]"
> Date:  Friday, July 10, 2015 at 9:37 AM
> To:  "[email protected]"
> Subject:  Re: [Pound Mailing List] Crime vulnerability on 2.7f upstream
>
>
> With either of the cipher suites given in this thread I am still showing
> vulnerable to the CRIME attack.
>
> With this suite: HIGH:!aNULL:!SSLv2:!ADH:!EXP:!eNULL:!RC4:MEDIUM:!LOW it
> is showing BEAST and CRIME and no TLS 1.1/1.2
>
> This one:
> EECDH+ECDSA+AESGCM:EECDH+ECDSA+SHA384:EECDH+ECDSA+SHA256:ECDH+AESGCM:ECDH+AES256:ECDH+AES128:ECDH+3DES:RSA+AESGCM:RSA+AES:RSA+3DES:!eNULL:!LOW:!aNULL:!MD5:!DSS
>
> is showing vulnerable to the CRIME attack (TLS compression).
>
> My main issue is that TLS compression is still enabled for some reason
> even with the 2.7f version of Pound.
>
> Below is the config (sanitized):
>
> ######################################################################
> ##GLOBAL OPTIONS
> User "root"
> Group "root"
> ## allow PUT and DELETE also (by default only GET, POST and HEAD)?:
> #ExtendedHTTP 0
> ## Logging: (goes to syslog by default)
> ## 0no logging
> ## 1normal
> ## 2extended
> ## 3Apache-style (common log format)
> #LogFacility local5
> LogLevel 0
> ## check timeouts:
> Timeout 45
> ConnTO 20
> Alive 10
> Client 30
> Control "/tmp/xxxx_pound.socket"
> #HTTP(S) LISTENERS
> ListenHTTPS
> Err414 "/usr/local/zenloadbalancer/config/xxxx_Err414.html"
> Err500 "/usr/local/zenloadbalancer/config/xxxx_Err500.html"
> Err501 "/usr/local/zenloadbalancer/config/xxxx_Err501.html"
> Err503 "/usr/local/zenloadbalancer/config/xxxx_Err503.html"
> Address 192.168.xx.xx
> Port 443
> xHTTP 0
> RewriteLocation 0
> Disable SSLv3
>
> Cert "/usr/local/zenloadbalancer/config/xxxx.pem"
> Ciphers
> "EECDH+ECDSA+AESGCM:EECDH+ECDSA+SHA384:EECDH+ECDSA+SHA256:ECDH+AESGCM:ECDH+AES256:ECDH+AES128:ECDH+3DES:RSA+AESGCM:RSA+AES:RSA+3DES:!eNULL:!LOW:!aNULL:!MD5:!DSS"
> SSLAllowClientRenegotiation     0
>         SSLHonorCipherOrder 1
> #ZWACL-INI
>
> Service "xxxx_Backends"
> ##False##HTTPS-backend##
> HeadRequire "Host:
>
>
> xxxx.xxx.com <http://xxxx.xxx.com> <http://xxxx.xxx.com>"
>                 #Url ""
>                 #Redirect ""
>                 #Session
>                         #Type nothing
>                         #TTL 120
>                         #ID "sessionname"
>                 #End
>                 #BackEnd
>
> BackEnd
> Address 192.168.xx.xx
> Port 80
> TimeOut 10
> End
> BackEnd
> Address 192.168.xx.xx
> Port 80
> TimeOut 10
> End
> BackEnd
> Address 192.168.xx.xx
> Port 80
> TimeOut 10
> End
> BackEnd
> Address 192.168.xx.xx
> Port 80
> TimeOut 10
> End
>                 #End
> End
> #ZWACL-END
>
>
> #Service "xxxx"
> ##False##HTTPS-backend##
>                 #HeadRequire "Host: "
>                 #Url ""
>                 #Redirect ""
>                 #Session
>                         #Type nothing
>                         #TTL 120
>                         #ID "sessionname"
>                 #End
>                 #BackEnd
>
>                 #End
> #End
>
>
> End
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 7:02 AM, Emilio Campos
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> By the way, someone can obtain a A+ with pound2.7 or higher? In my case I
> use 2.8.a with only A.
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
>
> 2015-07-10 10:44 GMT+02:00 Scott McKeown
> <[email protected]>:
>
> Hi Mirek,
>
> Thanks, I'm guessing that there must be an additional patch in v2.7 that
> I've not used in our build
>
> Time to do some more testing I guess.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10 July 2015 at 09:20, Miroslav Danek
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Scott,
>
> i use stable 2.7, CentOS 6.6 + openssl 1.0.1e
>
>
>
>
>
> Mirek
>
>
> On 10. 7. 2015, at 9:56, Scott McKeown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Mirek,
> What version of pound are you using for this, we have as of yet net been
> able to get FS with pound...
>
>
> On 10 July 2015 at 08:31, Miroslav Danek
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Rick,
>
> i used this one:
>
> Disable SSLv3
> SSLAllowClientRenegotiation 0
> SSLHonorCipherOrder 1
> Ciphers "HIGH:!aNULL:!SSLv2:!ADH:!EXP:!eNULL:!RC4:MEDIUM:!LOW"
>
> Result A with FS.
>
> regards
> Mirek
>
>
> On 10. 7. 2015, at 9:07, Scott McKeown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Rick,
>
> Your current Cipher list is very open if you can give this one a go and
> let us know the report status (we get an A- with no FS)
>
>
> EECDH+ECDSA+AESGCM:EECDH+ECDSA+SHA384:EECDH+ECDSA+SHA256:ECDH+AESGCM:ECDH+AES256:ECDH+AES128:ECDH+3DES:RSA+AESGCM:RSA+AES:RSA+3DES:!eNULL:!LOW:!aNULL:!MD5:!DSS
>
>
> If you could also post a sanitised copy of your pound config file we can
> see what we can do for you.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 9 July 2015 at 22:55, Rick Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I am running Pound 2.7f from
> https://github.com/goochjj/pound/archive/stage_for_upstream/v2.7f.zip <
> https://github.com/goochjj/pound/archive/stage_for_upstream/v2.7f.zip>
>
> I am also running openssl version 1.01p from Jul 9, 2015.
>
> I am trying to achieve a better ranking for our SSL support.
>
> I have been able to move up to a C rating but for some reason here are my
> results.
>
> I am using the following ciphers: RC4-SHA:HIGH:!ADH:!SSLv2:!AES
> I enabled the Disable SSLv3 directive and I have the following also
> enabled for the listener:
>
> SSLAllowClientRenegotiation     0
> SSLHonorCipherOrder 1
>
>
> This is after much trial and error.  I thought that this upstream version
> disabled TLS compression but it appears to still be active.
>
> Questions:
>
> 1)  How can I disable TLS compression?
> 2)  Can I enable TLS 1.1 and 1.2?
> 3)  How can I disable support for weak DH key exchanges?
> 4)  WHy isn't PFS enabled?  I assume the ciphers need fixing?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rick
>
>
>
>
> This server supports weak Diffie-Hellman (DH) key exchange parameters.
> Grade capped to B.   MORE INFO » <https://weakdh.org/>
> This server does not mitigate the CRIME attack <
> https://community.qualys.com/blogs/securitylabs/2012/09/14/crime-information-leakage-attack-against-ssltls
> >.
>  Grade capped to C.
> The server supports only older protocols, but not the current best TLS
> 1.2. Grade capped to C.  MORE INFO » <
> https://community.qualys.com/blogs/securitylabs/2015/05/22/ssl-labs-increased-penalty-when-tls-12-is-not-supported
> >
> This server accepts the RC4 cipher, which is weak. Grade capped to B.
> MORE INFO » <
> https://community.qualys.com/blogs/securitylabs/2013/03/19/rc4-in-tls-is-broken-now-what
> >
> The server does not support Forward Secrecy with the reference browsers.
> MORE INFO » <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_secrecy>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> With Kind Regards.
>
> Scott McKeown
> Loadbalancer.org <http://loadbalancer.org/>
> http://www.loadbalancer.org <http://www.loadbalancer.org/>
> Tel (UK) - +44 (0) 3303801064 <tel:%2B44%20%280%29%203303801064>
> <tel:0%29%203303801064> (24x7)
> Tel (US) -
> +1 888.867.9504 <tel:%2B1%20888.867.9504> <tel:%2B1%20888.867.9504> (Toll
> Free)(24x7)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> With Kind Regards.
>
> Scott McKeown
> Loadbalancer.org <http://Loadbalancer.org>
> http://www.loadbalancer.org <http://www.loadbalancer.org/>
> Tel (UK) - +44 (0) 3303801064 <tel:%2B44%20%280%29%203303801064>
> <tel:0%29%203303801064> (24x7)
> Tel (US) -
> +1 888.867.9504 <tel:%2B1%20888.867.9504> <tel:%2B1%20888.867.9504> (Toll
> Free)(24x7)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> With Kind Regards.
>
> Scott McKeown
> Loadbalancer.org
> http://www.loadbalancer.org
> Tel (UK) - +44 (0)
> 3303801064 <tel:3303801064> <tel:3303801064 <tel:3303801064>> (24x7)
> Tel (US) -
> +1 888.867.9504 <tel:%2B1%20888.867.9504> <tel:%2B1%20888.867.9504> (Toll
> Free)(24x7)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Load balancer distribution - Open Source Project
> http://www.zenloadbalancer.com
> Distribution list (subscribe):
> [email protected] <mailto:
> [email protected]>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to