We have a web application that is required to run on HTTPS. We started to use a third party control that uses Websockets to connect to a windows service that will be running on the user computer. This page states that websockets should not be used in a mixed content environment. Is this security consideration still applies in this case (the websocket connection is not trying to connect to the same server that handled the https request)? If so, why would a websockets to a localhost would need to be secured? Isn't this just added complexity for no reason?
Related
My Spring app uses lets encrypt and is https only. I did not include http to https thing, as it worked for me in postman with https:// format
When I deployed to Cloud Run, and mentioned the custom port (the port specified in spring)
and tested using URL from dashboard
https://..blah..run.app
I am getting error/message
Bad Request
This combination of host and port requires TLS.
What configuration is required on Cloud Run to resolve this?
The url as I see on service details page has htpps://...
EDIT:
If Cloudrun does not need me to take case of SSL, I can remove the application properties entries
server.ssl.key-store-type=PKCS12
server.ssl.key-store=classpath:key/keystore.p12
server.ssl.key-store-password=${lets.secret}
server.ssl.key-alias=someCertAlias
server.ssl.enabled=true
So Can I get an answer on whether to remove SSL from spring?
If cloudrun always uses http, all my calls use redirectConnector, which seems pointless
The Cloud Run Service listens on HTTP and HTTPS. Your application running in the container must listen on a port configured with HTTP only.
FYI: For a public facing web server, you should almost always enable HTTP. Otherwise, when a user enters www.example.com in the browser, the user will receive a connect error. This not always the case, for example .dev gTLDs, but is good practice. When a user connects to Cloud Run with the HTTP protocol, Cloud Run will redirect the user to HTTPS and connect to your application using the HTTP protocol.
I have a corporate proxy using Squid and kerberos for authentication, the proxy is configured for standard use, I.E allow http, https, a few others and block everything else. Now, there are many applications that support basic proxy authentication, but do not support Kerberos based authentication and many others that connect directly to the internet. I used Proxifier before the upgrade to kerberos to make my applications use the proxy, but I cannot do so now. I then installed an application called PX to create a proxy that connects to kerberos, but the proxy it creates is a simple HTTP Proxy and proxifier doesn't work correctly with it. Anyone has a setup for a situation like this?. I use Windows 10 and I obviously don't have access to the server where squid is configured. The application I need to connect to the internet uses standard https ports, it's not a torrent application nor anything that uses the ports blocked by squid. Thanks in advance.
Ok, for this particular case I've found the following setup to solve 99% of my problems.
First get Px here https://github.com/genotrance/px
Next get Fiddler: http://www.getfiddler.com/dl/Fiddler4BetaSetup.exe
Configure PX with your user and your domain and run it. By default it creates a running proxy on 127.0.0.1:3128
Configure your sistem proxy to use the proxy supplied by PX.
Execute fiddler, it should create ANOTHER proxy at 127.0.0.1:8888
Use this proxy in your apps. Proxifier should work as well.
Why use fiddler and not the direct 127.0.0.1:3128?, PX creates a pure http proxy and fiddler allows to tunnel https and connect request through it.
Any requests will pass through fiddler which will redirect them to the PX proxy which will redirect them to the squid proxy (So expect very slow speeds).
In the end since you're just redirecting your apps towards your proxy, if your proxy bans using regex expressions or direct IP connections some apps will NOT work, and in these cases using TOR or a VPN is the only real solution. Hope it helps someone avoid all the headaches I went through.
I've to design a solution that permits to read real-time data generated by local sensors through a remotely-hosted web application.
The design is still work in progress: the sensors' data could be handled by a windows application/service installed on the client machine, or by some external hardware (like a raspberry) located on the same network of the client machine.
Now, I'm very new to WebSockets, but they seems exactly what I need for providing real-time data via browser.
My question is: can a remote web application open a WebSocket to a server that is located on the same local network which the client belongs to?
Is solution B possible? How can I achieve that?
For example, I'd like the server to be located on the client localhost. Sensors would send data to the local windows service, and the web application would show them by opening a WebSocket to localhost (client localhost, not server localhost!).
Well, I did some testing and the answer is yes, it is possible.
Test setup:
A web page hosted on a remote server, with a WebSocket client which connects to 'localhost'.
WebSocket server running on my pc.
It worked.
I have windows server 2012 with all Internet outgoing traffic blocked. I have an application that needs to access a public web service through https. In our company we use IE proxy for http or https web requests via IE browser. Do you know how to use this proxy to allow the application sends https requests to this external Web Service?
Whether or not your application uses the system proxy settings (the ones IE uses and any other WinInet-based application uses) will depend on that application.
What is the application?
i'me working on a web server using play framework 2.0, where the login is executed by a android device software we're also making. And are main concern is that we can't find any support for HTTPS in play 2.0. Sense this is a school project we can't aford clouds nor other proxy to solve the HTTPS for us.
Our main problem is the password and email going in plain sight in the request's body, encrypting and decrypting in the mobile device and on the server looks costly in performance and sense HTTPS takes care of this we wanted to avoid it. Is there any way we can use HTTPS to protect the users login data, or any other suggestion.
If not we might have to migrate all are application to another framework, because it wont look good important confidential data going through the internet without encryption.
Historically, I've seen most folks run the Java/Scala application server behind a reverse proxy of some kind. Setting up HTTPS in apache isn't too hard, and then just use ModProxy to send requests internally to your Play application.
Any one of the reverse proxy systems can likely do this, nginx is popular too, and generally has easier configuration than apache, but I've never used it with HTTPS.
The number one reason normally to do this is security. You can't start a Java program as a non privileged user on port 80. If you start your Java program as root running on port 80, then any hole in your application has root privileges! As a result, starting the Java app on another port, then reverse proxy from an web server that can run as a non-priveleged user on port 80.
(*) This is a slightly over-simplified, but a discussion of this weirdness is beyond the scope of this I think.
It's now possible to use Play and https directly. This was added in Play 2.1
Simply start the server with:
JAVA_OPTS=-Dhttps.port=9001 play start