Cloudflare blocking websocket connection - websocket

I have a node js web app that has a websocket server. When I connect to it from the same domain, the websocket connects but when I try to connect from a different domain it does not work. Is there any cloudflare settings that could be blocking this?

Changed minimum TLS version from1.3 to 1 because websockets use lower TLS version

Related

Gateway API - Apache APISIX with Secured Websockets

I am trying to add an API Gateway to a client-server system, which communicates through WebSockets.
The Server is an audio recognition engine that sits in a remote machine, and clients are connecting to it through WebSockets ('wss://...'), sending audio files and receiving their text translate representation.
My main goal is to add a free open-source API Gateway in the middle in order to authenticate\authorize\rate limit\etc (Tried Kong\Tyk\krakenD, but they are not free).
After searching the web, I focused on Apache APISIX gateway.
As a test, I managed to connect the APISIX to a client-server which communicates by http/https and it worked fine.
Moreover, I managed to connect the client with the server on regular websocket connection (ws://) and the data transactions were successful, but no matter what I do I cant connect to the secured connection. Are there any special configurations I should edit in the dashboard?
I'm wondering if anyone knows from experience if it's possible to use
the secured WebSockets with Apache APISIX and if yes, how exactly it should be done - because the docs are missing any informative info\examples, or if there are better solutions known to my problem.
The only WebSocket reference in APISIX dashboard -
What you should do is create an SSL object (you can find it in the sidebar on the left side). See https://apisix.apache.org/docs/apisix/admin-api/#ssl to learn the APISIX SSL object.
You can see an example at https://apisix.apache.org/docs/apisix/certificate
The SSL object provides the required TLS Certificate and Private Key so that this key pair can be used in a TLS handshake according to the TLS SNI sent from clients. After that, your client established a secured connection with APISIX, and now you can send the WebSocket traffic securely.

Firewall blocks connection to second WebSocket server

In short we have two separate servers for our web app. The first one is the main server that uses Websockets for handling "chat rooms", and the second server only handles WebRTC audio chat rooms via Websocket. Both servers use Express to create a HTTPS server, use secure Websocket and the port 443.
I recently encountered a problem where a corporate client's firewall blocked the wss-connection to only the WebRTC server. The error logged in the user's browser was "ERR_CONNECTION_TIMED_OUT", which means the user never connects via Websocket. This has not happened with any other clients.
The Websocket connection works normally between the user and the main server, and no rules have been added to their firewall to use our app.
Has anyone encountered something similar? What kind of a firewall setting might cause this? Could this be a cors problem, since the servers are on their own sub-domains?
The main server could be restricting the type of data sent on port 443, which will use SSL to secure that transmitted data.
Refer to this page for information on the "Well-know port numbers".
The WebRTC audio data may need to be transmitted on its own dedicated port number that has been configured on the main server for this.
The problem was that the main server WebSocket used TCP and the WebRTC server used UDP, and UDP was blocked by corporate firewall on default.
WebRTC should use TCP as a backup, but I'm assuming UDP is still needed for the handshake.

How to access event machine websockets through Thin/nginx?

I have an event-machine websocket application (using the em-websocket gem) and it runs fine. The problem is that I need to deploy it using port 80 through nginx (can't compile it with tcp proxy module). Is it possible to use a simple nginx proxy_pass pointing to a thin server and have the thin server to pass the requests to my websocket server?
From what I understand you can't proxy websocket traffic with a proxy_pass.
Since web sockets are done over HTTP 1.1 connections (where the handshake and upgrade are completed), your backend needs to support HTTP 1.1, and from what I have researched, they break the HTTP 1.0 spec...
I've seen some people try to do the same thing with socket.io and HAProxy (see links). I would guess that you could try to swap out the socket.io with em-websockets and expect similar results.
1: http://www.letseehere.com/reverse-proxy-web-sockets
2: HAProxy + WebSocket Disconnection

handle CONNECT requests in a websocket server

My websocket server listens on port 8080 with no proxy.
Most of the time I'm getting requests with the Upgrade Websocket header and it works fine.
Sometimes I'm getting HTTP CONNECT requests.
Is this a valid request?
Does it means that there is a proxy server between the client and the server?
How my server is suppose to respond to the CONNECT request?
Thanks
You are getting CONNECT requests because you are likely to have configured your browser to use a proxy. If you directed your browser to use port 8080 on your local IP address, it will assume there is a proxy and that means when you ask for a secure connection, the browser leads with CONNECT.
You will need to add support for SSL/TLS tunnelling to your server to deal with this.

Why don't current websocket client implementations support proxies?

A Web Socket detects the presence of a proxy server and automatically sets up a tunnel to pass through the proxy. The tunnel is established by issuing an HTTP CONNECT statement to the proxy server, which requests for the proxy server to open a TCP/IP connection to a specific host and port. Once the tunnel is set up, communication can flow unimpeded through the proxy. Since HTTP/S works in a similar fashion, secure Web Sockets over SSL can leverage the same HTTP CONNECT technique. [1]
OK, sounds useful! But, in the client implementations I've seen thus far (Go [2], Java [3]) I do not see anything related to proxy detection.
Am I missing something or are these implementations just young? I know WebSockets is extremely new and client implementations may be equally young and immature. I just want to know if I'm missing something about proxy detection and handling.
[1] http://www.kaazing.org/confluence/display/KAAZING/What+is+an+HTML+5+WebSocket
[2] http://golang.org/src/pkg/websocket/client.go
[3] http://github.com/adamac/Java-WebSocket-client/raw/master/src/com/sixfire/websocket/WebSocket.java
Let me try to explain the different success rates you may have encountered. While the HTML5 Web Socket protocol itself is unaware of proxy servers and firewalls, it features an HTTP-compatible handshake so that HTTP servers can share their default HTTP and HTTPS ports (80 and 443) with a Web Sockets gateway or server.
The Web Socket protocol defines a ws:// and wss:// prefix to indicate a WebSocket and a WebSocket Secure connection, respectively. Both schemes use an HTTP upgrade mechanism to upgrade to the Web Socket protocol. Some proxy servers are harmless and work fine with Web Sockets; others will prevent Web Sockets from working correctly, causing the connection to fail. In some cases additional proxy server configuration may be required, and certain proxy servers may need to be upgraded to support Web Sockets.
If unencrypted WebSocket traffic flows through an explicit or a transparent proxy server on its way the WebSocket server, then, whether or not the proxy server behaves as it should, the connection is almost certainly bound to fail today (in the future, proxy servers may become Web Socket aware). Therefore, unencrypted WebSocket connections should be used only in the simplest topologies.
If encrypted WebSocket connection is used, then the use of Transport Layer Security (TLS) in the Web Sockets Secure connection ensures that an HTTP CONNECT command is issued when the browser is configured to use an explicit proxy server. This sets up a tunnel, which provides low-level end-to-end TCP communication through the HTTP proxy, between the Web Sockets Secure client and the WebSocket server. In the case of transparent proxy servers, the browser is unaware of the proxy server, so no HTTP CONNECT is sent. However, since the wire traffic is encrypted, intermediate transparent proxy servers may simply allow the encrypted traffic through, so there is a much better chance that the WebSocket connection will succeed if Web Sockets Secure is used. Using encryption, of course, is not free, but often provides the highest success rate.
One way to see it in action is to download and install the Kaazing WebSocket Gateway--a highly optimized, proxy-aware WebSocket gateway, which provides native WebSocket support as well as a full emulation of the standard for older browsers.
The answer is that these clients simply do not support proxies.
-Occam
The communication channel is already established by the time the WebSocket protocol enters the scene. The WebSocket is built on top of TCP and HTTP so you don't have to care about the things already done by these protocols, including proxies.
When a WebSocket connection is established it always starts with a HTTP/TCP connection which is later "upgraded" during the "handshake" phase of WebSocket. At this time the tunnel is established so the proxies are transparent, there's no need to care about them.
Regarding websocket clients and transparent proxies,
I think websocket client connections will fail most of the time for the following reasons (not tested):
If the connection is in clear, since the client does not know it is communicating with a http proxy server, it won't send the "CONNECT TO" instruction that turns the http proxy into a tcp proxy (needed for the client after the websocket handshake). It could work if the proxy supports natively websocket and handles the URL with the ws scheme differently than http.
If the connection is in SSL, the transparent proxy cannot know to which server it should connect to since it has decrypt the host name in the https request. It could by either generating a self-signed certificate on the fly (like for SSLStrip) or providing its own static certificate and decrypt the communication but if the client validates the server certificate it will fail (see https://serverfault.com/questions/369829/setting-up-a-transparent-ssl-proxy).
You mentioned Java proxies, and to respond to that I wanted to mention that Java-Websocket now supports proxies.
You can see the information about that here: http://github.com/TooTallNate/Java-WebSocket/issues/88
websocket-client, a Python package, supports proxies, at the very least over secure scheme wss:// as in that case proxy need no be aware of the traffic it forwards.
https://github.com/liris/websocket-client/commit/9f4cdb9ec982bfedb9270e883adab2e028bbd8e9

Resources